[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 60 (Friday, May 3, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4694-S4695]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                             SENATE ISSUES


                            Livestock Prices

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I come to the floor to make a couple of 
remarks. It was not my intention to come back to the floor, having 
spoken a little bit earlier today, but I wish to make three points. The 
first has to do with the issue raised by the distinguished majority 
leader about livestock prices. He mentioned that the market is 
responding, and I am very hopeful that it will continue to respond to 
the actions taken this week.
  There is no one more responsible for the fact that those actions have 
been extraordinarily beneficial to cattle producers across this country 
than the President himself. The President and I discussed, as he did 
with other Senators, the possibility of holding a livestock meeting 
last weekend. We held that meeting Tuesday afternoon, and as early as 
Wednesday morning the livestock markets began to respond. They 
responded Wednesday, they responded Thursday, and now they have 
responded again today. We have seen about a 12- to 14-percent increase 
in livestock prices in the futures markets directly as a result of the 
actions taken by the White House, by this President on Tuesday 
afternoon.
  The President is limited, of course, in the actions he can take 
unilaterally, but he has, in my view, pulled out virtually every stop 
to ensure that those prices go up. He is going to do all he can within 
his power and authority, both internationally and domestically. So I 
applaud him for the actions he has taken.
  Hopefully, we will have the opportunity here on the Senate floor to 
provide him with additional authority. There is $300 million sitting 
without the prospect of any utilization this year in the Export 
Enhancement Program. That money could be directed toward livestock and 
other markets abroad. It will take legislative authority, and we will 
provide our colleagues with an opportunity to vote on that Export 
Enhancement Program in the future.
  Clearly, we have to respond. Prices in real terms are as low as they 
were in the 1930's, and the more we do, the more action we can take 
both in the short and the long terms, the more we can send as clear a 
message to the markets as possible that we want to work with those in 
the livestock industry to ensure a stable price, to ensure longer term 
viability, to ensure that we do not find ourselves in a disaster 
situation in the weeks and months ahead if we can avoid it.
  So I applaud the President in his actions on Tuesday. It was he and 
the Secretary of Agriculture, of course, who formed the livestock 
concentration commission that, in our view, could also be very 
beneficial in providing some guidance on how we deal with those markets 
more effectively. When three corporations control more than 80 percent 
of the livestock market, we should not be surprised that prices are as 
volatile and certainly as difficult to bear for thousands of producers 
across the country as they are today.
  So we will wait with some confidence that the commission will make 
recommendations that also could be very beneficial, beginning in early 
June.


                            The Minimum Wage

  The second point I want to raise this afternoon has to do with the 
procedural situation we face yet again on the Senate floor. We will be 
taking up a bill that I think will probably enjoy pretty broad support. 
Frankly, I am disappointed once again that the so-called parliamentary 
trees have been filled in an effort to preclude Senators from offering 
other amendments.

[[Page S4695]]

  I have never seen so many of my Republican colleagues so willing to 
act like Members of the House as I have in the last couple of weeks. If 
they want to be in the House of Representatives, perhaps they should 
run for the House of Representatives. In the House of Representatives 
of course we have limited opportunities to offer amendments, limited 
opportunities to debate important issues, rules that constrain 
individual Members. But that has never been the purpose of the U.S. 
Senate. Here in the U.S. Senate we have always had the opportunity to 
bring up amendments, to have good debates on important issues, 
regardless of whether committees have reported out that specific 
legislation. Yet, over the last several weeks, the majority has 
precluded amendments from the minority in an effort to thwart those of 
us who want to bring to the floor an up-or-down vote on the minimum 
wage.
  We may be denied that vote temporarily. The majority can continue to 
delay that vote. But ultimately we will have a vote on minimum wage, 
whether it is this week or next week or the week after or the week 
after that. Sooner or later the Senate must come to the realization 
that we cannot for all perpetuity and for the rest of this session of 
Congress, deny the right of Members to have a vote on something they 
view to be very important.
  The minimum wage must come before our Senate colleagues. The minimum 
wage must be voted upon. Whether it is on this bill or another bill, 
hopefully in the not too distant future we can work out an arrangement 
that will allow us the opportunity to vote on an issue that is of great 
importance to millions and millions of working families. Let us hope it 
is sooner rather than later.


                      Congressional Investigations

  Finally, I think it is important to note that there will be many, 
many investigations on a lot of different issues. Senator Bumpers said 
it so well just a moment ago. Often the reason investigations occur is 
that is where the lights are, that is where the cameras are. While 
there is an unlimited array of opportunities for our colleagues to 
investigate, I must say I am astounded, absolutely astounded that so 
many of our colleagues in the House of Representatives, who claim to be 
fiscal conservatives, who claim to be protecting the taxpayer at each 
and every turn, will now support a so-called investigation for $1 
million in taxpayers' money to look at whether or not arms shipments 
were made to Bosnians in a way that may or may not be questionable--$1 
million.
  This is from our colleagues in the House who have said over and over 
again we want to balance the budget, we want to cut down expenses, cut 
Head Start, cut school lunch, cut all the programs directly affecting 
children and education; we are going to cut and cut and cut everything 
affecting real people. But when it comes to an investigation that has 
virtually no basis, which has already been investigated in the 
intelligence committees, we are going to find a way to spend $1 million 
and we are going to try to spend that $1 million in the next couple of 
months. For Heaven's sake, where does it all end? And how, with a 
straight face, can any of our colleagues conclude that an issue of this 
limited scope is worth a $1 million investigation?
  I do not even know how they are going to spend it. Maybe they will 
buy television ads with it, who knows? But I must tell you, I think 
that is a waste. And I hope our colleagues on the other side will do 
everything in their power to see the taxpayers are given a better 
accounting; to see that we put a stop to that kind of flagrant abuse of 
authority. That ought not happen.
  We have seen too much of it in this Congress. Again, it is an 
illustration of the extreme level, the extreme degree to which some on 
the other side will go to make a political point. That is wrong. It is 
deeply unfortunate. It sends all the wrong messages about what we ought 
to be doing and how sincere we are in bringing about a balanced Federal 
budget.
  We will be debating a balanced budget perhaps as early as next week, 
once again. And how ironic, as we talk about amending our Constitution, 
that somehow we can find ways to spend $1 million on whether or not 
arms were shipped to our Bosnian friends in a way that was generally 
supported by many of our colleagues on the other side. So, we will have 
much more to say about that in the future.
  I hope we can work in a bipartisan way to resolve whatever 
outstanding questions there are about what happened, whether it was in 
our long-term best interests to do so. All we can say with certainty is 
that our Bosnian policy is working. Having been there myself, having 
talked to the military, having talked to all of those directly 
involved, I can say without equivocation, this has been a success story 
the likes of which nobody could have realized a few months ago, a 
success story for which we can be very, very proud.
  I hope we can continue to build upon that success and send the right 
message about our intentions there and the opportunity to bring real 
peace. That can happen. But it is not going to happen if we find 
ourselves mired in politics, spending millions and millions of dollars 
on investigations that are unwarranted.
  With that, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________