[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 7, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11-S14]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                PROVIDING FOR ADJOURNMENT OF THE SENATE

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send an adjournment resolution to the desk 
providing for adjournment of the Senate over until Tuesday, January 21. 
I ask unanimous consent that it be reported by title, agreed to, and 
the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin is recognized.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I have had some discussion with the 
majority and minority leaders on this question. I feel very strongly, 
and I think that an overwhelming majority of people in the country 
feel, that there is no more important thing we can do than to pass a 
reform bill and get a lot of this big money out of politics.
  In this last election cycle, we saw the worst of the worst on top of 
a system that has not worked well for the people in the country. I feel 
like we should not--go into recess and we ought to get started on this. 
I wonder if the majority leader can make a commitment that within the 
first 100 days, we will at least have such a bill on the floor of the 
Senate.
  Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. I will say to the distinguished Senator that it is my 
intent to urge early consideration of the issues that came to the 
forefront during the campaign and the election last year. I have asked 
the Governmental Affairs Committee to be the only committee to take a 
look at some of the alleged violations that occurred--perhaps some 
illegalities even, in terms of contributions during the campaign--to 
see if there is anything there that will justify proceeding further. I 
am not prejudging that at all.
  I also have had an early conversation with the chairman of the Rules 
Committee and have asked him to have some early hearings--and these are 
not intended to be dilatory at all--hearings to get into, seriously, 
what happened, what needs to be done, to see if we can find a way that 
we can come to an agreement on a bill that can pass the Senate, one 
that will not be filibustered by the Democrats or by the Republicans. 
Clearly, we have some disagreements on what the solutions are, but I 
fear that if we try to put a specific date on it, it will make the 
likelihood of our success less likely or more difficult.
  I think that the Senate should proceed always with thought and 
thoroughness and try to see where we can come together. We can 
establish right here right now what we can't agree on. The question is 
what can we agree on. So we are intent on working on that.
  The various committees have some things they are going to have to 
work on. The Rules Committee has an assignment right now that they are 
going to have to work on. I am going to urge Senator Warner not to let 
that interfere with getting together in a bipartisan way to see if we 
can come up with some agreement.
  We have the confirmations which we will be trying to do. We have a 
lot of things coming to the forefront. I am hoping, for instance, that 
we can take up and consider the so-called ISTEA bill, the highway bill, 
before the Easter recess. It is a reauthorization we have to do. It is 
very important all across this country. I am not saying it is as 
important or more important than campaign finance reform. I am just 
saying there is a lot of work we need to do.
  On the 21st, it is my hope and desire, after notification of the 
Democratic leader, to inform all Senators what the bills are that we 
hope to deal with before the Easter recess, perhaps on the floor. It 
will not be all inclusive.
  I will be happy to talk further with the Senator from Minnesota. We 
are not going to try to shove this aside. I don't think we can. There 
are too many questions raised by this election. There are too many 
questions about how contributions are made, who makes them, how much 
they can make. I don't think we have all the answers yet, though, and 
to say we are going to do it in a 100-day demarcation--I have not even 
had a chance to look at the calendar and see what that means. It might 
be during the middle of the period that we said we would be out for the 
Easter recess.
  I have tried working with Senator Daschle to tell Members more this 
year than has usually been the case what they can expect or anticipate 
in terms of being out. I would like, at least, to have us sit down and 
look at the calendar and see what this means and how it affects other 
things, such as budget negotiations, the importance of bringing it up 
before the Easter recess. The law requires we act before April 15 on 
the budget resolution. Why don't we try to do it before April 15 and 
comply with the law? In order to do that, and the way that time falls, 
there is only 1 week after the Easter recess before the 15th.

[[Page S12]]

  I am hoping we will do--the House and Senate working with the 
administration--the budget resolution before the Easter recess so we 
can come back and get the final agreement on the conference report.
  That is why I ask the Senator, if he will, to give us the opportunity 
to show our good faith to work seriously on this matter, but without 
any arbitrary deadline before we even have a chance to sit down and see 
what it means on the calendar.

  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, can I also make a comment? Let me, first, 
compliment the distinguished Senator from Minnesota for his adamant 
endorsement of the need to move ahead on campaign finance reform. I 
share his utter frustration and extraordinary concern for the current 
method with which we finance our campaigns. I share it to the degree 
that I intend to offer, as the very first bill that I will introduce, 
in consultation, of course, with our conference tomorrow, S. 11, a 
campaign finance reform bill built upon the remarkable work done by a 
previous majority leader, Senator Byrd, years ago, as well as Senators 
Feingold, Kerry, and others who have played a key role in this debate 
in the past. I will do so with every expectation that we can succeed, 
at long last, to pass meaningful, comprehensive campaign finance reform 
this year. And I feel as strongly as the Senator from Minnesota that 
the legislation should be considered as early as possible. It is long 
overdue.
  But, as the majority leader has indicated, some of that work is 
already being done, and there are other issues that must also be 
considered on a timely basis. For example, I am concerned--and I 
discussed this again with the President as recently as yesterday--about 
the need to accelerate consideration of the chemical weapons treaty, 
because if we are not able to complete our work on that particular 
measure prior to the first part of April, we will suffer extraordinary 
diplomatic and legal consequences in the international community.
  So not only do we have the budget, but we have the chemical weapons 
treaty and a number of other issues that will have to be addressed. 
That does not mean we cannot begin to work and work through all of the 
issues relating to campaign finance reform in a timely, meaningful and, 
hopefully, bipartisan fashion. We must do that, but we don't need 
immediate floor time necessarily to do that. We do need a commitment on 
both sides to begin working together to finally enact fair, meaningful 
reform.
  The majority leader has given me that commitment in the discussions 
we have had with regard to both the committees, as well as his 
individual efforts, to come to some resolution on this matter. I am 
hopeful we can do that.
  So, in working with the Senator from Minnesota, and certainly with 
the majority leader and others, I believe we are off to a start that 
ought to ensure some optimism with regard to our prospects for success 
on campaign finance reform this year.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I 
appreciate the discussions that I have had with the majority leader and 
minority leader. I was trying to get back to them as they were going 
through the resolutions.
  I guess when I hear the majority leader and minority leader speak 
about this and other business that we have to transact, while I 
absolutely am convinced about their commitment, it just brings into 
even sharper focus for me the need for this body to make a commitment: 
that we will by the end of 100 days have a bill on the floor of the 
Senate. We have been talking about this for a long, long time. I don't 
have the experience some Senators do. I am just starting my second 
term. But every single time this has come up, speeches have been made, 
and then we end up not passing a reform bill. I think nothing could be 
more important than for us to make a commitment.
  What about within the first 4 months as opposed to the first 3 
months? Can the majority leader make a commitment that he will do 
everything possible to try to have a bill on the floor of the Senate 
within a 4-month period? That is reasonable, and that is all I am 
asking for.
  I think the majority leader is committed to this. I want to say to my 
friend, and he is a friend, that of course I am not judging what the 
specific content will be. I am not requesting any commitment to a 
particular content, but I am requesting a commitment that we go on 
record and--you know, if we had to have a vote on this, then I think it 
would be a vote as to whether or not Senators, Democrats and 
Republicans, are serious about taking action within a 4-month period, 
which is very reasonable. I do not know how many votes there would be, 
but I think that is what it is about. I want to be counted as someone 
who is willing to make a commitment to this.
  Would the majority leader be willing to make a commitment that 
certainly with his considerable skill and ability he will, along with 
the minority leader with his skill and ability, that the two of them 
together as leadership, will make a commitment that within the first 4 
months they will do everything possible to take action and have the 
debate that the people in the country are ready for and pass--and 
pass--the piece of legislation? We do not have to say ``pass,'' but at 
least bring a bill to the floor.
  Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, just a bit of history, as I recall it. Of 
course, we have passed campaign finance reform bills in the past. I 
voted for the one that is in law now. I believe, in more recent 
history, there have been occasions when maybe--I know the Senate passed 
a bill one year. I think it wound up languishing in the House. And then 
the reverse, I think, has happened. I really believe from my time in 
watching the Senate that some time is your ally, giving things an 
opportunity to be carefully considered and percolate along a little 
bit.
  Last year a lot of people talked about how we were able to get a lot 
of legislation passed at the end of the session. One of the reasons is 
a lot of those bills had been in the mill for months, some of them 2 
years, some of them 10 years. But they finally were ready, and they, in 
most instances, had broad support. So there is a history of our making 
a run at it. We make a stand, we make a statement; we get nothing. Are 
we interested in making a statement about our concern, or are we 
interested in getting something done? I think the latter is the case.
  When you talk about 4 months, for instance, are you talking about 
April? Once again, if you are--January, February, March, April--you are 
not talking about much difference from the first request. When you add 
again, when you look at the budget issue, when you look at the 
potential for when we deal with the Chemical Weapons Treaty, if we do 
come to that agreement, that understanding, I believe there is a 
significance to April 15 for that.
  I just again implore my colleague from Minnesota not to try to set a 
specific date. This is not going to be your last opportunity. This is 
only your first opportunity. You will have an opportunity to witness 
our conduct and judge whether or not it is being seriously discussed. 
There are a lot of people with a lot of different interests here that 
Senators have who have worked on it in the past, like Senator Feingold 
or Senator McCain and Senator McConnell, and others who feel more 
concerned about it this year than they did even a year ago.
  I have talked with a lot of Senators already and outside groups that 
are concerned in all kinds of ways about how we do this. We are not 
ignoring it at all. You are working on it. We are working on it. We are 
already making progress. You have a bill that perhaps is the same bill, 
perhaps with some modification, as the bill last year sponsored by 
Senators Feingold, McCain and others. But let us get started. Let us 
see how we do. And the Senator can witness our advent.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, if I could just also respond to a couple 
things.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. First of all, let me say I have not had the opportunity 
to talk with Senator Feingold and Senator McCain and Senator John Kerry

[[Page S13]]

and others, including Senator Levin, who expressed a real interest in 
this issue as to what timeframe they would propose.
  I would like to seize on the phrase that the distinguished Senator 
from Minnesota used just a moment ago. That is ``make your best 
effort.'' He said, ``Will you make your best effort?'' And he suggested 
a timeframe. I think I can say on behalf of both leaders--certainly for 
myself--that we are going to make our best effort. He knows my resolve 
to get this effort accomplished in a successful way. I think the 
distinguished majority leader has also expressed a determined interest 
in finding ways to do it.
  We will make our best effort and we will do everything possible to 
bring this to the floor at the earliest possible time with the greatest 
degree of expectation that we will succeed. It is my hope that we will 
succeed in 100 days or 4 months or at some timeframe within the first 
part of this year. I wish we had succeeded in previous Congresses. And 
I have a very strong sense of urgency about reforming the system as 
soon as possible so that we can restore some public faith in our 
electoral system and get on with other pressing business. Still, I 
think what is more important than the day we start floor consideration 
is the sincerity of the effort itself and a commitment to that effort 
on the part of both sides. I think that you have heard that 
demonstrated again this morning.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will not drag this on. I have some 
mixed feelings. I think I will have to object because, again, I have 
tremendous respect for both leaders, but when I hear language about 
``best effort,'' ``within as reasonable a time period as possible,'' it 
just represents really not any kind of specific commitment at all.
  I will just say that those who have worked on the reform--and the 
Senator mentioned many; the Senator mentioned Republicans as well as 
Democrats--every one of them has said, if we let this drag on, we are 
going to have more and more acrimony, given all sorts of hearings and 
whatnot coming up, and we are going to make a huge mistake. We need to 
make this a priority of this 105th Congress, and we need to focus on 
this, and we need to get the job done. I think a 4-month period is more 
than reasonable just to have a commitment from the leadership to make 
every effort possible. I am willing to go with that language to have 
such a piece of legislation on the floor of the Senate, understanding 
that this is the core issue.
  I think really this is an issue that people are talking about more 
than any other issue in the country right now. I do not think it is 
unreasonable. I thought 100 days, and I thought 4 months. I do not 
think it would be unreasonable at all for me to make this request. I do 
not know why the leadership would not be able to say we will make every 
effort possible to have this bill on the floor within the next 4 
months. And if not, then I think I will object.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, before the objection is heard, I would like 
to make one additional point.
  If the Senator objects, then we will have to put in a quorum and go 
with another alternative, which would be to basically have to recess 
over until every 3 days and the House and the Senate then will have to 
make arrangements to come in every third day, to call our staff to be 
here, and to go through the costs of doing that. I just do not think 
that is the way we want to begin the year, going through an exercise 
that is not necessary, that does cost time and money, without 
accomplishing anything.
  I again implore the Senator to think about what we have had to say, 
and I ask him not to object at this point on our opening day. This is 
just the kickoff. Let us not fumble on the first play and look at the 
alternative.
  The alternative, if the Senator objects--we are not going to get a 
recorded vote on it. We are going to go to another alternative, which 
will lead to inconvenience and costs without any positive results. I 
hope the Senator will also factor that into his feelings. The Senator 
has not, and I have not, allowed this to become acrimonious or 
partisan. I do not want it to be. But the Senator would leave us no 
option at this point on our first day but to consider another route.
  So I remind the Senator one more time, too, that last year there were 
enough different times that I made some commitments to him that were 
not necessarily well received on my side. But we kept our word. We got 
the job done. I may not be able to do just that same sort of thing this 
time. But I hope that the majority leader's assurances on opening day, 
based on my relatively short time but the record that I have, would 
have weight with the Senator from Minnesota. We are asking the Senator, 
both of us, the leaders, to give us this opportunity to show our good 
intentions. Then if the Senator is not satisfied with it, come back 
again.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, if I could also add, the majority leader 
has referenced times when we have very willingly accommodated the 
Senator from Minnesota. I can recall on a number of occasions over the 
last 24 months requests made by the distinguished Senator from 
Minnesota that we have been able to accommodate to suit schedules and 
to suit other legislative needs. I will certainly look forward to 
accommodating his needs and requests during the 105th Congress.
  I hope that Senators who have objections will notify me personally 
prior to the time they are going to come to the floor with indications 
of this kind. It is cumbersome and certainly has created difficulties 
for Senators who are not here. So it is my hope, too, to accommodate 
Senators, to demonstrate again a willingness to work together, again, 
with the clear understanding that I am every bit as committed as he has 
indicated he is to campaign finance reform. I also urge the Senator to 
cooperate and to work with us on this particular matter.

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, finally, and so we can move forward, 
just one more time for the context, this is the core issue. That is why 
I come to the floor. I know other Senators feel the same. I do not lay 
any claim to more righteousness about it. This is a core issue.
  People in the country have just absolutely lost their confidence in 
this political process. I do not think they are real optimistic about 
our taking any action. In all due respect to the leadership, I have 
heard too many of my own colleagues talk about reform and then dismiss 
it, saying it is not going to really happen. I already hear the 
discussions of how people can raise money for the next cycle.
  The only request I made of leadership today--and the wording really 
is, I think, very modest. It was just a commitment from the leadership. 
I started out 100 days, at least within the next 4 months, that the 
leadership would make a commitment to do everything possible to get a 
reform bill on the floor of the Senate. That is all I asked for.
  Now, Mr. President, the majority leader said, well, the only 
alternative is to go into recess. That is not the only alternative. 
That is not my alternative. We have a vote. We can have a vote on 
adjournment. I know what the vote will be. I am sure there will be an 
overwhelming vote for adjournment. But if there are only two people, 
one, or three that say, ``No, we are ready to take on this reform and 
get to work,'' I am proud to be counted as the one or two or three. 
This is not the only alternative.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I withhold for a moment.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I was watching on television the 
discussion going on here. I just urge my colleague from Minnesota to 
let us go ahead with the ordinary historical business of the Senate. He 
and I share the same zeal, dedication, and effort toward getting this 
issue done. I appreciate the comments of the majority leader and of the 
distinguished Democrat leader.
  I think at this point it would not be appropriate for us to begin the 
very first day of the U.S. Senate, the first day of the new term, for 
us to begin on this note. I think we will have plenty of time to adopt 
that strategy and tactic. I do not like for us to discomfort our 
colleagues on this day of celebration for both new and reelected 
Members. I think that the issue has to be addressed as quickly as 
possible. I believe that American public opinion will

[[Page S14]]

demand that we move forward. I do not think there is any doubt about 
it.
  I urge my friend from Minnesota to let the Senate move forward on 
this day, this very important day, before we have to start calling 
people back here and going into quorum calls and that kind of thing. 
This is, if I may say in all due respect to my friend from Minnesota, 
not appropriate on this day. I urge my friend from Minnesota allow the 
Senate to move forward, again, reemphasizing my commitment to him that 
we will move forward in a bipartisan fashion on this compelling issue.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Could I ask my colleague from Arizona--I do not think 
it puts him on the spot--I have no question about his commitment or the 
commitment of any number of other Senators. I find it puzzling that the 
only thing I asked for today--because I do have a real fear this is 
just going to get put off and we are not going to take action--the only 
thing I asked for, and maybe my colleague did not hear this, was a 
commitment from the leadership to do everything possible, I used that 
word, and I started with 100 days, within 4 months, and get a bill on 
the floor. That is all I ask for.
  I think it would be very important to get that kind of a leadership 
commitment.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I had suggested the absence of quorum. I 
think we need to have the opportunity----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the majority leader yield?
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I join the distinguished Democratic leader 
in suggesting the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I have listened to my three colleagues, 
and having been sworn in today I understand their point about the 
occasion. So what I want to do, in the spirit of the special day today, 
I withdraw my objection, but I want to go on record, I am going on 
record today that I am going to have the same amendment dealing with 
our recess in February if we do not get to work on this. We should not 
be taking a recess in February if we are not going to take up this 
piece of legislation of reform as soon as possible, that we are 
dragging it out, and I can see what is going to happen.
  So today I will not object, but I will come out with a similar 
initiative, I say to my colleague from Arizona, and maybe we should be 
working today and saying we should not be in recess in February.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, let me thank the distinguished Senator 
from Minnesota for his cooperation this afternoon. He feels very, very 
strongly about this issue and has confirmed that again in a colloquy 
over the last half hour. I appreciate very much his resolve and intend 
to work with him very carefully and closely to see that we 
expeditiously consider this very important legislation.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, did the Chair rule that the unanimous-
consent request was approved?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The unanimous-consent request has been 
approved.
  The concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 3) was agreed to, as follows:

                             S. Con. Res. 3

       Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives 
     concurring), That when the Senate recesses or adjourns on 
     Thursday, January 9, 1997, pursuant to a motion made by the 
     Majority Leader or his designee, in accordance with the 
     provisions of this resolution, it stand recessed or adjourned 
     until 12:00 noon on Tuesday, January 21, 1997, or until such 
     time on that day as may be specified by the Majority Leader 
     or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn, or until 
     12:00 noon on the second day after Members are notified to 
     reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
     resolution; and that when the House adjourns on Thursday, 
     January 9, 1997, it stand adjourned until 10:00 a.m. on 
     Monday, January 20, 1997; that when the House adjourns on 
     Monday, January 20, 1997, it stand adjourned until 12:00 noon 
     on Tuesday, January 21, 1997; and that when the House 
     adjourns on Tuesday, January 21, 1997, it stand adjourned 
     until 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, February 4, 1997, or until 12:00 
     noon on the second day after Members are notified to 
     reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
     resolution.
       Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker 
     of the House, acting jointly after consultation with the 
     Minority Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the 
     House, shall notify the Members of the Senate and the House, 
     respectively, to reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the 
     public interest shall warrant it.

                          ____________________