[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 26, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2893-S2899]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PRESIDIO PROPERTIES ADMINISTRATION ACT OF 1995
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the pending business.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 1296) to provide for the administration of
certain Presidio properties at a minimal cost to the Federal
taxpayer.
The Senate resumed consideration of the bill.
Pending: Murkowski modified amendment No. 3564, in the
nature of a substitute.
amendment no. 3564, as modified
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, I rise today in support of my substitute
amendment for the Presidio bill, offered in conjunction with the
Senator from Alaska and the majority leader. Many people have been
waiting a long time for this bill. I know the Senators from California
and Congresswoman Pelosi have put a great deal of time and energy into
this legislation, as have the staff from the Energy Committee and
personal offices. In our efforts to try to reach consensus on all
levels, we have managed to craft a bill that will provide enough
balance and flexibility to incorporate all points of view. This bill
offers a unique, creative and innovative approach to provide for the
long-term protection and preservation of one of our Nation's greatest
cultural, historical, and natural treasures.
When I was a college student at San Jose State University, my buddies
and I would often take off for the weekend to ``the city.'' One of my
favorite places back then was the Presidio, and I spent a lot of time
exploring the batteries and bunkers along the coast. It is just a
spectacular site, situated on the threshold of the Golden Gate Bridge,
overlooking the entire bay area. Last fall, I had the opportunity to
visit the Presidio, and found that the base had changed very little in
the years since I was a college student at San Jose.
There is something very special about the Presidio. The natural
beauty, as well as the impressive history of the site captivated me 40
years ago, and continues to captivate millions of tourists, locals, and
even some politicians today.
Before Christopher Columbus arrived in the New World, the indigenous
tribes of Ohlone and Miwok inhabited the area known now as San
Francisco. Taking advantage of this unique natural harbor, these tribes
flourished from fishing in the plentiful bay.
When the land was finally taken over by the white new immigrants, the
Presidio almost immediately became a strategic military post. For over
220 years, the Presidio is the oldest continually operated military
post, commanded first by Spain in 1776, then Mexico and finally the
United States in 1846. The Presidio has played a supporting role in
almost every single major military conflict the United States has ever
engaged in, starting with the Spanish-American War to the Civil War,
World War I, and of course, World War II. The Presidio served also as a
refuge for an estimated 16,000 people after the great earthquake and
fire of 1906, and was the very first Army airfield established in the
Nation in 1921.
Mr. President, the history of this national historic landmark is
indeed distinguished and celebrated. I comment on it to describe to my
colleagues the unique nature of this site and thus to explain the
particulars of the legislation it requires.
For the past 7 years, since the Base Closure and Realignment
Commission [BRAC] included the Presidio on its list of bases to be
closed, the fate of the Presidio has been somewhat uncertain. When the
National Park Service took control of the post in 1994, along with the
addition of one of the most glorious parks to the system, the Park
Service was faced with one of their most complex and challenging
management problems.
Aside from its spectacular natural beauty, the Presidio is unlike any
other national park. Scattered throughout the grounds are over 1,200
residential units, more than 6.2 million square feet of building space,
and dozens of miles of paved roads. Because of the nature of the
historic facilities, the cost of maintenance and management of this
site is a whopping $25 million a year, making it our most expensive
national park. Faced with the fiscal realities that we, in the Federal
Government, must confront, the question that was posed to Congress was
this: How can we continue to protect and preserve the Presidio for the
benefit of all Americans without draining the already limited reserves
of the National Park Service?
Mr. President, I believe the substitute amendment offered by Senators
Dole and Murkowski and myself answers this question and in so doing,
strikes the balance that we are all looking for.
The bill before us today establishes a mechanism that will reduce the
need for appropriations to operate the Presidio. Rather than seeing the
infrastructure in the Presidio as obstacles to the preservation of the
park, this bill will utilize these buildings to generate revenues that
will be recycled back into the funds that manage the park. By weaning
the Presidio off of Federal taxpayer dependency, this bill will
eventually create a self-sustaining park. The management structure
created by our bill will enable the Presidio to be used in such a way
that it will pay for itself.
Mr. President, our legislation will create a public-private
management entity--the Presidio Trust--to provide for the management of
the leasing, maintenance, and repair of the property within the
Presidio. In addition, the National Park Service will continue to
provide its expert guidance for interpretive services, visitor
orientation, and educational programs. Under the structure of
cooperative management, this bill will allow the trust (made up of
private sector real estate and finance experts) and the Park Service to
manage what they manage best, thereby eliminating costly bureaucratic
blunders. If the bill is enacted, the Presidio will be the only unit of
the National Park System, that will cost significantly less in 10 years
than it costs today.
Mr. President, as I mentioned, I had the opportunity to tour the base
facilities in San Francisco, as well as meet with the various interest
groups last fall. While there were some differences on what the
legislation affecting the Presidio should include, the groups were
unanimous in their belief that the base should remain as a unit of the
National Park System. People expressed real fears that there was a
movement to sell the Presidio to a private developer, and I stated, at
the time, that a sale would happen, ``over my dead body.'' Many of my
colleagues feel the same way.
This bill will not enable private interests to develop swank upscale
condos, or private dining clubs. This bill will cater only to the
interests of all Americans, by protecting the invaluable cultural,
historic, and natural resources of the Presidio for this generation and
generations to come. It is quite simply a good government approach that
strikes a balance with the fiscal realities of our time with the need
for continued conservation and preservation. I urge my colleagues to
support this worthy piece of legislation.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, what is the pending business?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pending business is the substitute to H.R.
1296.
Mr. DOLE. Presidio properties bill, is that correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. DOLE. As I understand, I do not know how many different projects
are involved here, but they are all related and come from the Energy
and Natural Resources Committee. I understand the Senator from
Massachusetts would like to add to that the minimum wage amendment,
which we do not believe belongs on this bill. Maybe it will belong on
some other bill. It should not be considered at this time.
We would like to complete action on this. We have a number of items
to complete this week, including, we hope, the farm bill conference
report, line-item veto conference report, the omnibus appropriations
bill, and, of course, the debt ceiling. It would be our hope we can
complete action some time early on Friday. That may or may not happen.
If not, I suggest we probably would have to be here on Saturday to
complete action on those bills because some relate to whether or not
the Government is shut down. The debt extension is very important, too.
[[Page S2894]]
So we can avoid--there will be a cloture vote on this bill tomorrow
morning rather early. We have not decided the exact time, so we stay on
the matter and amendments germane to the pending business.
Amendment No. 3571 to Amendment No. 3564
(Purpose: To provide for the exchange of certain lands within the State
of Montana)
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole] for Mr. Burns, proposes
an amendment numbered 3571 to amendment No. 3564.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the end of the amendment, add the following:
TITLE --MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 01. LOST CREEK LAND EXCHANGE.
(a) Land Exchange.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Secretary of Agriculture (referred to in this Act as
the ``Secretary'') shall acquire by exchange certain land and
interests in land owned by R-Y Timber, Inc., its successors
and assigns or affiliates (referred to in this Act as ``R-
Y''), located in the Lost Creek area and other areas of the
Deerlodge National Forest, Montana.
(2) Offer and acceptance of land.--
(A) Non-federal land.--If R-Y offers fee title that is
acceptable to the United States to approximately 17,567 acres
of land owned by R-Y and available for exchange, the
Secretary shall accept a warranty deed to the land.
(B) Federal land.--
(i) Conveyance.--On acceptance of title to R-Y's land under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall convey to R-Y, subject to
reservations and valid existing rights, by patent, fee title
to lands and timber deeds of a value that is approximately
equal to the value of the land described in subsection (a).
(ii) Timber harvest provisions.--
(I) Practices.--Timber harvest practices used on the
national forest land conveyed under clause (i) shall be
conducted in accordance with Montana Forestry Best Management
Practices, the Montana Streamside Zone Management Law (Mont.
Code Ann. sec. 77-5-301 et seq.), and all other applicable
laws of the State of Montana.
(II) Relation to planned sales.--Timber harvest volumes on
land conveyed under clause (i) shall be in addition to, and
not treated in any way as an offset against, the present or
future planned timber sale quantities for the National Forest
where the harvesting occurs.
(III) Timber designations.--
(aa) Contract.--To ensure the expeditious and efficient
designation of timber on land conveyed under clause (i), the
Forest Service shall contract with a qualified private person
agreed on by the Secretary and R-Y to perform the field work
associated with the designations.
(bb) Minimum annual designations.--Not less than 20 percent
nor more than 30 percent of the timber on land conveyed under
clause (i) shall be made available by the end of each fiscal
year over a 5-year period beginning with the first fiscal
year that begins after the date of enactment of this Act, and
R-Y shall be allowed at least 5 years after the end of each
fiscal year in which to complete the harvest of timber
designated in that fiscal year.
(3) Title.--
(A) Review of title.--Not later than 30 days after receipt
of title documents from R-Y, the Secretary shall review the
title for the non-Federal land described in paragraph (2) and
determine whether--
(i) the applicable title standards for Federal land
acquisition have been satisfied or the quality of title is
otherwise acceptable to the Secretary;
(ii) all draft conveyances and closing documents have been
received and approved; and
(iii) a current title commitment verifying compliance with
applicable title standards has been issued to the Secretary.
(B) Unacceptable quality of title.--If the quality of title
does not meet Federal standards and is not otherwise
acceptable to the Secretary, the Secretary shall advise R-Y
regarding corrective actions necessary to make an affirmative
determination.
(C) Conveyance of title.--The Secretary shall effect the
conveyance of land described in paragraph (2) not later than
60 days after the Secretary has made an affirmative
determination of quality of title.
(b) General Provisions.--
(1) Maps and documents.--
(A) In general.--Maps pertaining to the land described in
subsection (a) are subject to such minor corrections as may
be agreed upon by the Secretary and R-Y.
(B) Notification.--The Secretary shall notify the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the
Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives of any
corrections made pursuant to this subsection.
(C) Public availability.--The maps and documents described
in subsection (a)(2) (A) and (B) shall be on file and
available for public inspection in the office of the Chief of
the Forest Service.
(2) National forest system land.--All land conveyed to the
United States under this section shall be added to and
administered as part of the Deerlodge National Forest in
accordance with the laws pertaining to the National Forest
System.
(3) Valuation.--The values of the lands and interests in
land to be exchanged under this section are deemed to be of
approximately equal value.
(4) Hazardous material liability.--The United States
(including its departments, agencies, and employees) shall
not be liable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), or any other
Federal, State, or local law, solely as a result of the
acquisition of an interest in the Lost Creek Tract or due to
circumstances or events occurring before acquisition,
including any release or threat of release of a hazardous
substance.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise to offer an amendment regarding the
Lost Creek Land Exchange Act of 1996.
This amendment is important for the acquisition of the Lost Creek
area of Montana for the public.
I want to emphasize that this amendment is a starting point. I fully
anticipate major changes will need to be made when this bill goes to
conference with the House. Yet, the process needs to move forward.
Under this amendment, 14,500 acres of blueribbon bighorn sheep
habitat known as Lost Creek would became a part of the Deerlodge
National Forest. For the past few years, local sportsmen and
conservation groups, the Forest Service, and many others have been
interested in the public acquiring this prime habitat. I, too, believe
this is a worthwhile endeavor.
The amendment would transfer the Lost Creek area, and 3,000
additional acres currently owned by R-Y Timber, to the Forest Service.
In return R-Y Timber will acquire the deed to land and timber.
The Lost Creek area has been valued at about $8 million. And the days
of the Federal Government simply paying the price tag are over.
With assistance from the Forest Service, I am hopeful that
alternative lands can be found to exchange for the Lost Creek area. The
Forest Service has started this process.
Mr. President, as I stated earlier the amendment I am offering is a
starting point. I fully anticipate having to make substantial changes
when we move to conference. I hope that the parties involved will
continue to work together so this win-win bill can made it to the
President's desk.
I yield the floor.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, 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.
Amendment No. 3572 to Amendment 3571
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send a second-degree amendment to the desk
and ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole] for Mr. Burns, proposes
an amendment numbered 3572 to amendment No. 3571.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be added insert the
following:
TITLE --MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 01. LOST CREEK LAND EXCHANGE.
(a) Land Exchange.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstnding any other provision of law,
the Secretary of Agriculture (referred to in this Act as the
``Secretary'') shall acquire by exchange certain land and
interests in land owned by R-Y Timber, Inc., its successors
and assigns or affiliates (referred to in this Act as ``R-
Y''), located in the Lost Creek area and other areas of the
Deerlodge National Forest, Montana.
(2) Offer and acceptance of land.--
(A) Non-federal land.--If R-Y offers fee title that is
acceptable to the United States to approximately 17,567 acres
of land owned by R-Y and available for exchange, the
Secretary shall accept a warranty deed to the land.
(B) Federal land.--
(i) Conveyance.--On acceptance of title to R-Y's land under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall convey to R-Y, subject to
reservations and valid existing rights, by patent, fee title
to lands and timber deeds of a
[[Page S2895]]
value that is approximately equal to the value of the land
described in subsection (a).
(ii) Timber harvest provisions.--
(I) Practices.--Timber harvest practices used on the
national forest land conveyed under clause (i) shall be
conducted in accordance with Montana Forestry Best Management
Practices, the Montana Streamside Zone Management Law (Mont.
Code Ann. sec. 77-5-301 et seq.), and all other applicable
laws of the State of Montana.
(II) Relation to planned sales.--Timber harvest volumes on
land conveyed under clause (i) shall be in addition to, and
not treated in any way as an offset against, the present or
future planned timber sale quantities for the National Forest
where the harvesting occurs.
(III) Timber designations.--
(aa) Contract.--To ensure the expeditious and efficient
designation of timber on land conveyed under clause (i), the
Forest Service shall contract with a qualified private person
agreed on by the Secretary and R-Y to perform the field work
associated with the designations.
(bb) Minimum annual designations.--Not less than 20 percent
nor more than 30 percent of the timber on land conveyed under
clause (i) shall be made available by the end of each fiscal
year over a 5-year period beginning with the first fiscal
year that begins after the date of enactment of this Act, and
R-Y shall be allowed at least 5 years after the end of each
fiscal year in which to complete the harvest of timber
designated in that fiscal year.
(3) Title.--
(A) Review of title.--Not later than 30 days after receipt
of title documents from R-Y, the Secretary shall review the
title for the non-Federal land described in paragraph (2) and
determine whether--
(i) the applicable title standards for Federal land
acquisition have been satisfied or the quality of title is
otherwise acceptable to the Secretary;
(ii) all draft conveyances and closing documents have been
received and approved; and
(iii) a current title commitment verifying compliance with
applicable title standards has been issued to the Secretary.
(B) Unacceptable quality of title.--If the quality of title
does not meet Federal standards and is not otherwise
acceptable to the Secretary, the Secretary shall advise R-Y
regarding corrective actions necessary to make an affirmative
determination.
(C) Conveyance of title.--The Secretary shall effect the
conveyance of land described in paragraph (2) not later than
60 days after the Secretary has made an affirmative
determination of quality of title.
(b) General Provisions.--
(1) Maps and documents.--
(A) In general.--Maps pertaining to the land described in
subsection (a) are subject to such minor corrections as may
be agreed upon by the Secretary and R-Y.
(B) Notification.--The Secretary shall notify the Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the
Committee on Resources of the House of Representatives of any
corrections made pursuant to this subsection.
(C) Public availability.--The maps and documents described
in subsection (a)(2) (A) and (B) shall be on file and
available for public inspection in the office of the Chief of
the Forest Service.
(2) National forest system land.--All land conveyed to the
United States under this section shall be added to and
administered as part of the Deerlodge National Forest in
accordance with the laws pertaining to the National Forest
System.
(3) Valuation.--The values of the lands and interests in
land to be exchanged under this section are deemed to be of
approximately equal value.
(4) Hazardous material liability.--The United States
(including its departments, agencies, and employees) shall
not be liable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.), the
Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), or any other
Federal, State, or local law, solely as a result of the
acquisition of an interest in the Lost Creek Tract or due to
circumstances or events occurring before acquisition,
including any release or threat of release of a hazardous
substance.
TITLE --VANCOUVER NATIONAL HISTORIC RESERVE
SEC. 01. VANCOUVER NATIONAL HISTORIC RESERVE.
(a) Establishment.--There is established the Vancouver
National Historic Reserve in the State of Washington
(referred to in this section as the ``Reserve'', consisting
of the area described in the report entitled ``Vancouver
National Historic Reserve Feasibility Study and Environmental
Assessment'' published by the Vancouver Historical Study
Commission and dated April 1993 as authorized by Public Law
101-523 (referred to in this section as the Vancouver
Historic Reserve Report).
(b) Administration.--The Reserve shall be administered in
accordance with--
(1) the Vancouver Historic Reserve Report (including the
specific findings and recommendations contained in the
report); and
(2) the Memorandum of Agreement between the Secretary of
the Interior, acting through the Director of the National
Park Service, and the city of Vancouver, Washington, dated
November 14, 1994.
(c) No Limitation on FAA Authority.--The establishment of
the Reserve shall not limit--
(1) the authority of the Federal Aviation Administration
over air traffic control, or aviation activities at Pearson
Airpark; or
(2) limit operations and airspace in the vicinity of
Portland International Airport.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I do not intend to object to the amendment,
but I think we ought to go by the rules. The Senator did ask for the
yeas and nays, so that is business intervening?
Mr. DOLE. Yes.
Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader is recognized.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I am disappointed that we have not had
the opportunity until now to debate the minimum wage amendment. On
April 1, it will be 5 years since the last time the minimum wage was
increased.
We are now at the lowest point we have been in nearly 40 years with
regard to the purchasing power the minimum wage provides. That is
unacceptable, at a time when we see CEO incomes going up by 23 percent
to an average in the country today of $990,000--something we do not
deny to them and something we certainly would not want to preclude.
Many of them certainly deserve it.
There ought to be recognition, however, as we consider welfare reform
and all of the other legislative measures that we are contemplating,
that we need to provide more opportunity for people to go to work, and
we ought to give them an economic incentive to do so.
People do not have the economic wherewithal, working full time at the
minimum-wage today, to stay out of poverty. That is unacceptable.
Sooner or later, we will have a vote on the minimum wage. Sooner or
later, it has to be resolved. Sooner or later, this minimum wage
increase must pass. We can do it sooner or we can do it later. Our
preference is to do it sooner. This vehicle affords us the opportunity
to do that. Whether it is this vehicle or any other bill, I certainly
hope that we can do it soon.
I yield to my colleague from Massachusetts.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy]
is recognized.
Amendment No. 3573
(Purpose: To provide for an increase in the minimum wage rate)
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask
for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy], for himself,
Mr. Kerry, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Simon, Ms. Mikulski,
Mr. Levin, Mr. Harkin, Mrs. Boxer, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Pell, Mr.
Leahy, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Bradley, and Mr.
Daschle, proposes an amendment numbered 3573.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
SEC. . INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE RATE.
Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) except as otherwise provided in this section, not
less than $4.25 an hour during the period ending July 3,
1996, not less than $4.70 an hour during the year beginning
July 4, 1996, and not less than $5.15 an hour after July 3,
1997;''.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, 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.
Amendment No. 3574 to Amendment No. 3573
(Purpose: To provide for an increase in the minimum wage rate)
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for
its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Kerry] proposes an
amendment numbered 3574 to amendment No. 3573.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the
amendment be dispensed with.
[[Page S2896]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted, insert the
following:
SEC. . INCREASE IN THE MINIMUM WAGE RATE.
Section 6(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29
U.S.C. 206(a)(1)) is amended to read as follows:
``(1) except as otherwise provided in this section, not
less than $4.25 an hour during the period ending July 3,
1996, not less than $4.70 an hour during the year beginning
July 5, 1996, and not less than $5.15 an hour after July 4,
1997;''.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, 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.
Mr. KENNEDY addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy]
is recognized.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I just heard from the majority leader a
few moments ago that we were not going to be able to have an
opportunity to debate and take action on the minimum wage.
We are required now to use whatever parliamentary means we can to try
and permit working families to see a judgment about whether this body
is going to make a statement about increasing the minimum wage. The
majority leader had been a leader in 1989 when we restored the minimum
wage up to the small increase in its purchasing power. If we could
gather from the majority leader--I see that he is moving into the
cloakroom at the present time, so I guess that is an indication of what
the answer would be.
We were going to try and get at least some agreement as to when we
might be able to bring this up. We are denied even that opportunity to
do so, in spite of the fact that there was an indication from the
Republican leadership that we were going to have the minority leader or
his designee be recognized to offer an amendment. And we understood,
since that was not a fixed order, that that was the intention of the
Republican leadership at that time. We were denied the opportunity to
have the bill before us.
Now we have the bill before us, and we were denied the opportunity to
be able to debate that, or at least get a short time agreement. We are
quite prepared to do it, as has been pointed out by my colleague from
Massachusetts, Senator Kerry, and Senator Wellstone.
This is not a new issue. We were prepared to enter into a short time
period, or at least have the opportunity to set a date for
consideration of it. If the majority leader would let us have a fixed
date for discussion on it--we were able to persuade the majority leader
earlier on the health care bill to set a time for debate on it--we
would certainly accede to the leader's recommendation, if we would have
a precise time when we would be able to debate it. So if we were able
to get a time definite, we would certainly respond to a request by the
leader to have a time definite to be able to vote on this.
Mr. President, raising the minimum wage has broad support among the
American people. The question is whether it has the support of the
Republican leadership here in the U.S. Senate, Senator Dole and the
rest of the Republican leadership.
As I mentioned earlier, Senator Dole supported this in the past. So
the question is whether he is willing at this time to give an
opportunity for us to vote on this measure now, or in the very near
future.
We believe that working families deserve a raise. Minimum-wage
families deserve a raise most of all. Nobody who works for a living
should have to live in poverty.
It is basically the leader's decision that is going to make all the
difference as to whether we are going to be able to act together, as we
have in the past. We saw Republican Presidents, like Eisenhower, Nixon,
Bush, who all supported that increase. And Republicans here, with some
exceptions, supported that increase in 1989. All we are waiting for--
and I think what the working families in this country are waiting for--
is the majority leader to indicate that he, like others in this body,
is on the side of working families. I hope that we will have a chance
to do this because, as we have said, this issue is not going to go
away. We understand the full agenda that is necessary for action.
I would certainly ask the minority leader if the time could be
established definite, if he would work out a precise time with the
majority leader so that working families in this country would know
when the Senate was going to debate this issue. We will have to try to
do the best we can under the circumstances that we have, but I deplore
the fact that we are effectively denied the opportunity to debate this
issue and to take action. I think it is an issue of fundamental
fairness and justice. It is an issue involving families, women, and
children, and the Senate should not turn its back on those families
this afternoon or in these next days.
Mr. WELLSTONE and Mr. KERRY addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. WELLSTONE. I will defer to my colleague from Massachusetts. I
will take 1 minute.
I have been in the Chamber since this morning with my two colleagues.
This amendment is simple and straightforward. It would increase the
minimum wage from $4.25 an hour to $5.15 over 2 years--90 cents over 2
years. I will say it one more time. Senators and Representatives gave
themselves, a few years ago, a very hefty salary increase from about
$100,000 a year to about $130,000 a year. It seems to me we can give
heads of working families the same kind of increase.
I do not think this is too much to ask. I think this is very much
about economic fairness. While we are putting off a vote on this, there
are many people who have to live with this minimum wage. This is
extremely important to 200,000 working families in my State, much less
their children, and I believe this effort to just block having an up-
or-down vote goes against the grain of what is called accountability.
We will bring this amendment up over and over and over and over again
until there is a vote.
I yield the floor.
Mr. KERRY addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, we came to the floor this morning with the
understanding that, while not as an official order, the minimum wage
amendment was going to be offered. The minority leader was going to
have time and the minority leader's designee was going to have an
opportunity to submit the amendment. Senator Kennedy was the designee
and, indeed, the Senator intended to offer the minimum wage amendment.
We were blocked this morning from doing that, and now this afternoon
a parliamentary process of what is called filling up the tree, putting
in two amendments behind each other, which locks in the debate again,
precludes a debate on the minimum wage at this time. But Senator
Kennedy has submitted an amendment to the underlying amendment, and I
have submitted a second-degree amendment to that not because we are
trying to tie up the Senate and not because we are trying to delay the
process of resolving this other legislation but simply because, as
Senator Kennedy has said, we would like to have an answer. We would
like to have a time.
We work this out in the Senate all the time. We have an agreement
with respect to the health care bill. We know there will be a time
certain for debate on an issue of major importance to the American
people. All we are asking for is some kind of bipartisan agreement and
understanding as to when we can have a vote, a debate and a decision,
on whether or not we are going to give working people at the lowest end
of the income scale a pay raise. Corporate America has had a pay raise
almost every day of the year last year. The stock market went up 34
percent in 1 year. The chief executive officers of companies are
walking away with, what, 200 times the salary of workers. It used to be
only 50 times and now it is 200 times.
The stark reality is that in the United States of America in 1996,
the minimum wage earns you a record 40-year low, or is about to earn
you a record 40-year low. It is a 25-percent reduction over what it was
in 1979. Through the 1950's, the 1960's, the 1970's, and finally even
in the 1980's, as the minimum wage gap got bigger and bigger between
[[Page S2897]]
what you earned working and the poverty level, we lifted it. All we are
suggesting is that when a worker on the minimum wage earns three-
quarters of the level of the poverty rate in this country, let us at
least lift it up to permit them to get out of poverty.
If you are going to give meaning to the notion of work and you are
going to give meaning to the notion of welfare reform, if you are going
to give meaning to the values we talk about in this Chamber, you have
to give meaning to work and the money that people earn for working.
Nothing is more fundamental, and we hope that the Senate will have the
opportunity to have a bipartisan vote on this issue.
Mr. KENNEDY. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. KERRY. I would be happy to yield for a question.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, as I understand, the pending issue before
the Senate is now the Kerry amendment. I was just wondering whether the
Senator, my colleague and friend, would be willing to vote on this so
that we are not going to delay this with the idea that we would vote
at, say, 4 o'clock with the time evenly divided between those who
support this measure and those who would be opposed. Would the
Senator----
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, let me say in answer to my colleague, I
would be delighted to have any fair amount of time on both sides. I
think it would be good if we could have that. I ask unanimous consent
that we have a vote at a time certain and have a vote on my underlying
amendment on the minimum wage at 4 o'clock.
Mr. DOLE. I object.
Mr. MURKOWSKI. I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. DOLE addressed the Chair.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield further?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts----
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, the regular order is----
Mr. DOLE. With no intervening action, I ask for recognition.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, are we going to get taken off our feet
now?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will suspend.
Mr. KENNEDY. Is the Senator going to be taken off his feet?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the Senator will suspend, the Senator from
Massachusetts has the floor.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I was going to yield for a question of my
colleague. I believe he wanted to ask me a question. I yield for the
purposes of answering the question.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I just ask my colleague then if we are
not able to get a time definite, which the Senator requested of the
Senate--there was objection to that--has the Senator reached the
conclusion that it is those who are objecting who are filibustering
consideration of the minimum wage legislation? Would that be his
conclusion, as it is mine?
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, let me answer the question of my colleague
before I draw a conclusion. I wonder, since the majority leader is in
the Chamber, if, without yielding my right to the floor, I could ask
the majority leader if he believes it would be possible for us to work
out some kind of agreement as to time for a vote.
The majority leader was not in the Chamber, but I did say while he
was out in the Cloakroom that this is not an effort to try to tie up
the Senate. This is not an effort to try to delay the progress on this
important legislation that we need to debate. This is simply an effort
to try to see if we could reach a time certain for a vote on the
minimum wage issue. I would ask the majority leader, without losing my
right to the floor, if he would be willing to answer a question with
respect to setting a time certain?
Mr. DOLE. Let me indicate I would be happy to discuss it. I am not
certain we could reach an agreement. But, obviously, this bill, this
amendment will, in effect, defeat the Presidio bill. There will not be
any vote on the amendment today. There will be a cloture vote tomorrow.
I assume cloture will not be invoked. Then the bill will come down, and
I assume then there will be an effort to offer it on the next measure
sometime this week. But I assume with the AFL-CIO in town and with
their pledge of $35 million, it is probably a fairly appropriate time
for Democrats to discuss this measure.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, without yet responding to the last comments
of the majority leader, I again might ask, again without losing my
right to the floor, I wonder if I could inquire of the majority leader
why it might not be possible to set a time certain sometime in the
future, perhaps a week or 2 weeks so that we could have at least a
consideration of this issue on the floor of the Senate. I wonder if the
majority leader might be willing to commit to that?
Mr. DOLE. Well, again, I will be happy to explore it. I have always
been willing to explore any possibility. Maybe we could couple it with
something we would like to do on this side of the aisle, something the
majority leader might like to have happen. We could work some agreement
like that. But, again, I have not--nobody has made a proposal except
the amendment has been offered.
I assume that sooner or later the issue will be voted upon, directly
or indirectly, but not today and not tomorrow and hopefully not this
week, because we have a number of issues before us and this will take,
as everyone knows, considerable debate. It is an unfunded mandate. It
is subject to a point of order, according to the Congressional Budget
Office. We all voted to end unfunded mandates, and here we are about to
impose, or would like to impose, at least some would like to impose,
another unfunded mandate on the very political subdivisions we said we
would not mandate different costs and expenditures, whatever. Unless
somebody has a proposal to make, now there is an amendment pending, and
my view is that we should debate it. If there is to be debate, that is
fine. There will be no vote. We will just wait and have the cloture
vote tomorrow morning.
Mr. KENNEDY. Will the Senator yield?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The junior Senator from Massachusetts has the
floor.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I would be happy to yield for a question to
the Senator from Massachusetts.
Mr. KENNEDY. Will the leader be willing to find an agreeable time
with the minority leader, the two leaders find an agreeable time, say,
by June 10, to consider this legislation in the Chamber?
Mr. DOLE. Again, I would be happy to discuss it with the
distinguished Democratic leader, Senator Daschle. I am not certain I
would make that agreement.
I know it is important on that side of the aisle. It may be important
to some on this side of the aisle. But it is also important to many
small businesses in America. It is very controversial.
I just do not believe it should be on this bill unless the intent is
to kill this bill. Maybe it is. I happen to support it. There are 23
States involved in this legislation: West Virginia, Massachusetts,
California, Louisiana, Tennessee. I do not think the State of Kansas is
involved, but there are a number of States--Colorado.
So I hope we might dispose of the pending legislation and then
complete action on a number of conference reports this week and get the
omnibus appropriation bill passed and the debt ceiling extension. That
would just about complete the week.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, could I reiterate? We were able to work
out, obviously, a very agreeable approach to the question on health
care which stymied us in a similar way for a period of time. I want to
reiterate to the majority leader, we are not trying to kill this bill,
at least for this reason. And we are not attempting to delay.
Would it be possible to have an agreement that we will vote on this
issue on a date certain between now and, say, the beginning of June? In
a discussion with the majority leader, the minority leader and majority
leader could arrive at a date certain for a vote?
Mr. DOLE. Again, I am always willing to try to resolve some of the
problems. This is not going to be an easy one because, as I recall, the
first 2 years of the Clinton administration, when the Democrats
controlled Congress, we did not have any votes on minimum wage. The
Democrats did not bring it up. They controlled everything. They
controlled the White House and the House and the Senate.
Now, suddenly, after the AFL has their meeting and pledges millions
and
[[Page S2898]]
millions of dollars, we want to bring it up on the floor. I can imagine
what would happen in the liberal media if the corporations came to town
and said we are going to put $35 million in the Republican campaigns.
There would be headlines in all the papers. All the talk shows would
stop in midair to get it on the air.
I think there is also a very logical argument. There are going to be
a lot of young people who lose their jobs. Many are black teenagers and
many are young people whose parents live below the poverty line. So I
think, if we are going to have this debate, it ought to be a lengthy
debate. It ought to be on the merits. In my view, it cannot happen--I
do not see how it can happen this week.
Obviously, the Senator is entitled, as he did, to offer an amendment
to the underlying bill. That was our mistake. We should have taken care
of that. It will not happen again.
But notwithstanding that, we can prevent a vote and we will prevent a
vote because we do not believe it belongs on this legislation. There
are 23 States that have an interest in the pending legislation. I do
not believe even the Democrats, who have very important projects in
this legislation, are very excited about having the two Senators from
Massachusetts offer this minimum wage adjustment to their legislation.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, let me say, in all respect, in response to
the majority leader, we had a vote in the U.S. Senate last year and 51
U.S. Senators voted that we should take up the minimum wage before the
end of the last session. We did not do that.
Now we are back. I did not even know about the AFL. I am glad you
told me. Maybe I can arrange to get to the meeting. But I did not even
know they were in town. We announced our intention to offer an
amendment some time ago--Senator Kennedy, who has been leading on this
effort, together with Senator Wellstone, a group of us--this has been
something we have been trying to do for a number of years. The fact is,
it is getting more necessary, not less, as a consequence of the fact
that the wage each day is worth less.
So, I say to the majority leader, we can always find a group that is
in town at some period of time when some legislation is on the floor,
and we all know Republicans collect far, far more money from interest
groups than Democrats ever do. If we want to start pointing fingers at
whose money comes from where, that is a different debate.
The fact is, working people do not get the kind of money any of us
get from anywhere, even from their work. That is what this debate is
all about. Folks who are working and cannot even pay for medical
insurance, let alone rent, let alone food.
So I regret the majority leader will not say we can have a vote on
this, will not even say we could have one by June. Therefore, Mr.
President, I move to table my amendment.
Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Abraham). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Thompson). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. DOLE. Is the question on the motion to table the Kerry amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Santorum). Yes.
Mr. DOLE. The yeas and nays have been ordered?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have been ordered.
Mr. DOLE. Let's have the vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to
table the Kerry amendment. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The
clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Simpson] is
necessarily absent.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. Bradley]
is necessarily absent.
I also announce that the Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Rockefeller]
is absent because of illness.
The result was announced--yeas 0, nays 97, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 52 Leg.]
NAYS--97
Abraham
Akaka
Ashcroft
Baucus
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Breaux
Brown
Bryan
Bumpers
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Conrad
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
Daschle
DeWine
Dodd
Dole
Domenici
Dorgan
Exon
Faircloth
Feingold
Feinstein
Ford
Frist
Glenn
Gorton
Graham
Gramm
Grams
Grassley
Gregg
Harkin
Hatch
Hatfield
Heflin
Helms
Hollings
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnston
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murkowski
Murray
Nickles
Nunn
Pell
Pressler
Pryor
Reid
Robb
Roth
Santorum
Sarbanes
Shelby
Simon
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Warner
Wellstone
Wyden
NOT VOTING--3
Bradley
Rockefeller
Simpson
So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 3574) was
rejected.
Cloture Motion
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I send a motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the Kennedy
amendment No. 3573.
Edward M. Kennedy, Paul Wellstone, Joe Biden, J.J. Exon,
Chuck Robb, Carol Moseley-Braun, Christopher Dodd,
Byron L. Dorgan, Claiborne Pell, Kent Conrad, John F.
Kerry, Ron Wyden, David Pryor, Russell D. Feingold,
Paul Sarbanes, Patrick Leahy, Dianne Feinstein, Frank
R. Lautenberg.
Mr. DOLE addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Motion to Commit
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send a motion to the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the motion.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole] moves to commit the
pending bill to the Finance Committee with instructions to
report by April 21, 1996 amendments to reform welfare and
Medicaid.
Mr. DOLE. 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.
Amendment No. 3653 to the Motion to Commit
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the motion to the
desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole] proposes an amendment
numbered 3653 to the motion to commit.
Strike the instructions in the pending motion and insert in
lieu thereof ``to report back by April 21, 1996 amendments to
reform welfare and Medicaid effective one day after the
effective date of the bill.''
Mr. DOLE. I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Amendment No. 3654 to Amendment No. 3653
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send a second-degree amendment to the
motion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Dole] proposes an amendment
numbered 3654 to amendment No. 3653.
[[Page S2899]]
Strike all after the first word in the amendment to the
instructions to the pending motion and insert in lieu thereof
``report back by April 21, 1996 amendments to reform welfare
and Medicaid effective two days after the effective date of
the bill.''
Mr. DOLE. 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.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, we are prepared to vote on this motion at
this time. Medicaid reform and welfare reform are high on everyone's
priority list in America, particularly the voters and the taxpayers,
and we would be prepared to vote on this motion, say, at 6 o'clock or 5
after 6 or 6:15, or whenever.
But I do believe now we are back on an issue that the American people
are really concerned about: how we can save maybe $50 billion on
welfare over the next 7 years by sending it back to the States, and
maybe as much as $85 billion over the next 7 years on Medicaid by
sending it back to the States, all in accordance with the 10th
amendment to the Constitution, which says unless the powers vested in
the Federal Government are denied to the States it belongs to the
States and the people.
That is what we will debate at this time, unless there is a
willingness to accept the amendments, or we can debate tomorrow after
the cloture vote, whichever the Democratic leader prefers.
But I am prepared and now ask that we stand in recess until 9:30
tomorrow morning.
Motion To Recess
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I now move the Senate stand in recess until
the hour of 9:30 a.m., Wednesday, March 27, 1996.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, 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. The
yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Vermont [Mr. Jeffords],
the Senator from Delaware [Mr. Roth], and the Senator from Wyoming [Mr.
Simpson] are necessarily absent.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. Bradley],
the Senator from Delaware [Mr. Biden], and the Senator from Connecticut
[Mr. Lieberman] are necessarily absent.
I also announce that the Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Rockefeller]
is absent because of illness.
The result was announced--yeas 50, nays 43, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 53 Leg.]
YEAS--50
Abraham
Ashcroft
Bennett
Bond
Brown
Burns
Campbell
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Faircloth
Frist
Gorton
Gramm
Grams
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Hatfield
Helms
Hutchison
Inhofe
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kyl
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nickles
Pressler
Santorum
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Warner
NAYS--43
Akaka
Baucus
Bingaman
Boxer
Breaux
Bryan
Bumpers
Byrd
Conrad
Daschle
Dodd
Dorgan
Exon
Feingold
Feinstein
Ford
Glenn
Graham
Harkin
Heflin
Hollings
Inouye
Johnston
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Mikulski
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murray
Nunn
Pell
Pryor
Reid
Robb
Sarbanes
Simon
Wellstone
Wyden
NOT VOTING--7
Biden
Bradley
Jeffords
Lieberman
Rockefeller
Roth
Simpson
____________________