[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.
____________________