[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 64 (Thursday, May 9, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4953-S4954]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         ACTIONS OF THE SENATE

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I wanted to just correct the record with 
regard to the suggestion of the Senator from Mississippi about actions 
that were taken by those of us who favor having an up-or-down vote on 
the minimum wage and the action that was necessary to try to keep the 
issue of the minimum wage before the U.S. Senate because, as the record 
shows very clearly, we have demonstrated a majority support for 
increasing the minimum wage as an amendment on legislation earlier this 
year, and at the time that the Senate voted by 55 votes, Republicans 
and Democrats, to increase the minimum wage. Our Republican majority 
leader made a motion to recommit the pending legislation, sending it 
back to the committee and having it returned to the floor without that 
amendment that was pending which would have effectively denied us any 
further debate or discussion of the minimum wage. And, before that 
action was processed, I filed a cloture motion on the minimum wage to 
at least assure that the Senate would have an opportunity to vote on 
the minimum wage issue and which we have been denied the opportunity to 
do.
  The Senator from Mississippi can continue to talk about the various 
procedures, processes, and actions that can be used by the Republican 
leadership to avoid this institution taking a vote up or down on the 
minimum wage, which they have been successful in doing. But I do not 
think there is an American today that does not understand that it has 
been the Republican leadership position in the House of Representatives 
and the Senate of the United States that is frustrating the 
overwhelming sentiment of the people of this country--in all regions of 
the country and among all ages of the country--that believe 
that fairness and decency ought to permit the Senate of the United 
States and the House of Representatives to vote on a modest increase 
for those men and women who work 40 hours a week, 52 weeks of the year, 
to try to provide for themselves and their families.

  That is not favored by the majority leadership. That is opposed by 
the Republican leadership, and the Senator from Mississippi, as 
outlined earlier, which may be of interest to I do not know who at this 
hour of the day here in the Senate, about various procedures that are 
utilized to deny us that opportunity. But I can tell you that there are 
families that are gathered around the kitchen table at this moment at 
6:30 at night, and there are the mothers of children that are gathered 
there at the kitchen table at this very moment that are wondering how 
they are going to pay the utility bill, or the emergency room bill, or 
the rent, or food on the table, or the clothing for their children. 
That is happening now. And, if they could afford a television and watch 
what is happening on the floor of the U.S. Senate, they have to ask, 
``Why? Why is the Republican leadership demanding or forbidding the 
opportunity to have an up-or-down vote on this measure one more day, 
one more day?''
  They denied it yesterday, denied it the day before, denied it the day 
before that, denied it last week, and denied it in the weeks before, in 
spite of the fact that the majority leader has voted for an increase in 
the minimum wage four times, voted against it eight times, but voted 
for it on four different occasions, and in spite of the fact that 
Republican Presidents Eisenhower, Bush, and Nixon have all supported an 
increase in the minimum wage. So, it is an interesting perhaps story 
about the procedural steps which have been taken by various Senators to 
deny an increase in the minimum wage.
  But, Mr. President, there is no doubt in the minds of the American 
people about what is taking place here in the U.S. Senate; Republican 
leadership denying working families on the bottom rung of the economic 
ladder the opportunity to have a living wage, a living wage for 
themselves and for their families, and that is wrong. No parliamentary 
procedure is going to change that fundamental fact.
  Now, Mr. President, in recent days a number of commentators have 
pointed out that the Senate seems to be in the doldrums, ``D-o-l-e-d-r-
u-m-s.'' I believe the normal spelling leaves out the ``e''--d-o-l-d-r-
u-m-s. I thought it might be worth listening to some of the dictionary 
definitions for that word.
  The Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines it this 
way:

       A state of inactivity or stagnation;
       A belt of calms and light baffling winds;

  Or, three:

       A dull, listless, depressed move; low spirits.

  The Oxford English Dictionary refers to the doldrums this way:

       A vessel almost becalmed, her sails flapping about in every 
     direction.

  It goes on to call it:

       A region of unbearable calm broken occasionally by violent 
     squalls.

  The American Heritage Dictionary defines it this way:

       Ocean regions near the equator characterized by calms, or 
     light winds, and the calms characteristic of;

  Or, second:

       The calms characteristic of these areas;

  Or, third:

       A period of inactivity, listlessness, or depression 
     probably influenced in form by the word ``tantrum.''

  That seems to fit the Senate precisely. First our Republican friends 
have a tantrum over the Democratic efforts to raise the minimum wage. 
Then our Republican friends go into the doldrums.
  The American people look to the Congress for action on the minimum 
wage, and all they see are cloture motions, quorum calls, and 
procedural gymnastics to avoid taking action.
  I say end the gridlock, end the deadlock, end the doldrums. The way 
for Senator Dole to find his way out of the doldrums is clear: Raise 
the minimum wage.
  Finally, Mr. President, on one other matter that was raised by my 
friend from Mississippi about cloture motions; and there will be those 
that will

[[Page S4954]]

study this period of history in the 102d, 103d, and the 104th Congress.
  What they will find is that the times when the cloture motions were 
filed was to close off the prolonged debate which was taking place in 
the Senate. But they will also find that when our Republican leadership 
has been filing the cloture motions in this Congress, it is not to 
terminate debate. It is to block out debate, to close out the 
possibilities to offer amendments to the underlying measure, a very 
significant and important difference. It can be made light of on the 
floor of the Senate, but every Member of this body ought to know what 
the significance and the difference is about in the application of 
cloture during this period of time--to close out debate, to deny the 
opportunity for Members to be able to express the interests of people 
they represent. It is unbecoming for this institution to be put in that 
position because this is the institution which has debated the great 
issues as well as less important issues over the period of the history 
of this Nation. Denying that opportunity for debate does not serve this 
institution or its tradition well. To the contrary.
  I wish to make just a final observation, Mr. President. I ask 
unanimous consent to be able to proceed for 3 or 4 more minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. KENNEDY. In every case where cloture was filed on an amendable 
vehicle during the 103d Congress and Republicans sought to offer 
amendments, amendments sponsored by or cosponsored by Republicans were 
voted on before the cloture vote. Do we hear that? In every case where 
cloture was filed on an amendable vehicle during the 103d Congress and 
Republicans sought to offer amendments, amendments sponsored by or 
cosponsored by Republicans were voted on before the cloture vote. Not 
today in terms of where we are on proposals of Democrats and on 
proposals that are cosponsored by Republicans, because the minimum wage 
increase is cosponsored by a Republican. In no case was the amendment 
tree completely filled to prevent Republicans from offering amendments 
after cloture was filed. In no case. In no case. I have heard that 
claim to be the case by the Republican majority leader and again 
repeated this afternoon. But the facts do not support that statement.
  Cloture was most frequently filed to close off debate in situations 
where amendments were not in order--conference reports, nominations, 
motions to proceed to bills. The only bill on which cloture was filed 
during the 103d Congress and no Republican amendments were offered was 
S. 414, the Brady bill. In that bill, cloture was filed on the 
Mitchell-Dole substitute amendment. There were no votes on Republican 
amendments because a unanimous-consent agreement was reached dictating 
which amendments would be permitted--unanimous consent--a completely 
different history than has been described either earlier this evening 
or by the majority leader on yesterday.

  So, Mr. President, as I mentioned, the people in my State who are 
receiving the minimum wage have been fortunate in that my State 
increased the minimum wage. Fortunately, it has been in effect since 
January of this year, and the unemployment has gone down. It has gone 
down. In our neighboring State of New Hampshire, where they have not 
increased it, the unemployment has gone up.
  So I will welcome the opportunity to debate the issue of whether the 
minimum wage adds to inflation, whether it adds to unemployment, about 
what the economic impact is going to be. We have ample examples of that 
from history. We have at other times reviewed that for the benefit of 
the Senate, and we will welcome the chance to either do that again or 
not do it.
  We continue to deny an increase in the minimum wage to hard-working 
Americans, most of whom are women. A good percentage of those women 
have small children. This is a women's issue. It is a families' issue. 
It is a children's issue. It is an issue for justice. It is an issue on 
decency. It is an issue on fairness. The American people understand 
that.
  So perhaps as we come to the conclusion of this week of Senate debate 
and discussion, those families are going to wonder why the Senate did 
not address this issue again. It is more and more difficult for this 
Senator to explain to families that are trying to provide for 
themselves and their families why Republican leaders refuse to give 
working families a livable wage that we have been prepared to do at 
other times in our history with Republicans and Democrats alike. The 
last time we increased it, we had a Democratic controlled Congress and 
a Republican President. Now we have a Republican Congress and a 
Democratic President, but the Republican leadership in the House of 
Representatives and the Senate of the United States has refused to do 
it.
  In a final point, I will say it is going to get done. It is going to 
get done, and those families ought to understand that it will get done. 
It will get done, I believe, sooner than later. We will continue to 
offer this amendment on the legislation, and if the Senator from 
Mississippi or the Senator from Kansas, the majority leader, want to go 
to this arcane procedure of denying any debate or discussion on either 
the minimum wage or any amendments thereto, they are going to have a 
very long spring and a very long summer, but we are going to prevail on 
this issue.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________