[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 111 (Thursday, July 31, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8406-S8410]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA REVITALIZATION ACT
Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I would like to comment on Title XI of
this legislation, the District of Columbia Revitalization Act. This is
a major piece of legislation, and in many ways a major accomplishment,
given that it was hammered out by a broad group of interested parties,
including members and staff from the Governmental Affairs Committee,
over a relatively short period of time. Agreement on this package was
preceded earlier this year by considerable work in the Governmental
Affairs Subcommittee chaired by Senator Brownback. Similar efforts were
undertaken by the House Subcommittee on the District of Columbia. This
Revitalization package was put together quickly, in a combined effort
by all concerned parties, because of a mutual recognition that the
District of Columbia's problems had become untenable. The broad
recognition of the magnitude of the problem plus the possibly unique
opportunity to come to agreement and enact reforms was what led so many
people to agree on a package that virtually everyone regards as less
than their ideal.
One significant concern I have about this package is the major
financial responsibility the Federal taxpayer is undertaking in the
years to come. Technically, the D.C. Revitalization package meets the
scoring requirements of this Balanced Budget Act, but the out-year
costs are enormous and have not been dealt with. We are still
evaluating the full impact of this package, but Members should be aware
that the $4.8 billion in pension liability the Federal Government will
be assuming is actually closer to $48 billion over time. I do believe
it may be possible for these potential out-year costs to be reduced.
The Revitalization package includes a provision which I requested
requiring the Secretary of the Treasury to conduct a study of the D.C.
pension assets and report back within a year on how the Federal
Government might put them to best use. The Governmental Affairs
Committee will then have the opportunity to consider whether additional
legislation in this area could improve the financial outlook. The
Administration has indicated a willingness to work further on this
issue with the Committee, and I certainly look forward to that. We
should be working together to institute reforms that make the District
work independently, not simply encouraging a Federal Government
takeover of all of its problems. There are assets currently in the D.C.
pension fund, and rather than simply spending down those assets, we
should build upon the assets so the funds are available to make
payments in the future.
Another area in which I question estimates of future costs is with
the transfer of D.C. Corrections to the Federal Bureau of Prisons. I
know the pressure was intense to close the Lorton Correctional Complex
in Virginia, but here again this bill makes the federal bureaucracy
responsible for absorbing the District's prison population. While the
bill incorporates provisions for privatization, I believe the record
will show that the Bureau of Prisons has consistently stood in the way
of increased privatization in the Federal prison system. I have no
reason to believe they will have a different response with regard to
the Lorton prisoners.
Many may not know that the District of Columbia was already engaged
in a program to privatize the corrections function and has already
entered into private contracts for housing 2,400 prisoners. I know well
from my experience in Tennessee that private corrections facilities are
a cost-effective, efficient and safe alternative to publicly-operated
facilities. I am disturbed that Congress has substituted its judgment
for the District's in this instance without evaluating whether the
District's privatization initiative for corrections would work.
Privatization can save valuable taxpayer dollars. In this instance,
it is conceivable that the Federal Government could save the entire
$885 million estimated for construction of new facilities if the
District were allowed to continue on its current course. Because I
believe these cost savings are important--and because this agreement
was reached without sufficient debate--I want my colleagues to be aware
that I, and other of my colleagues, want to work on follow-up
legislation in this area as well. I think we can do better and I want
to work toward that end.
In conclusion, while this D.C. Revitalization Act is the result of a
major, almost unprecedented effort by many with the best interest of
the citizens of the District in mind, the reforms will require some
additional thought and work to make the package live up to its full
potential.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, how much time do we have on each side
equally?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico has 10 minutes
remaining, and the Senator from New Jersey has 12 minutes remaining.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I yield myself 5 of our 10 minutes.
First, Mr. President, usually we thank a lot of people. There are so
many staff people that I am not going to thank them all, but I will put
all of their names in the Record. There are so many heroes.
But I do want to pay tribute to a staff member from the House. His
name is Rick May. He has been staff director of the Budget Committee in
the House. He is a graduate of Ohio State. He works for Representative
John Kasich. He has been their budget overseer for 10 years, working on
budget issues since 1983. He helped put together the alternative that
John Kasich offered in 1989. It started with just 30 votes. John
Kasich's leadership has grown. And right at his right hand has been
Rick May. He is going to join a firm here in town, and I wish him well,
and want the Senate Record to reflect that we appreciate what he has
done.
Mr. President, before I begin my remarks, I would like to take a
moment to thank all of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, who
have seen me stand in this well time and time again, and have listened
to me speak about a balanced Federal budget. I want to thank you all--
from the bottom of my heart--for your patience and your support.
Mr. President, I would like to thank the ranking member of the Budget
Committee, Senator Lautenberg. I turn to him and just say thank you.
You have been an active member of the Senate Budget Committee for
many years, but in your first year as ranking member you have
represented the interests of your party and your constituents in an
honest and forthright manner. I have enjoyed working with you.
I would like to thank the chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator
Roth. Few have worked harder or longer to ease the tax burden on
American families. But the package that you helped fashion, Senator
Roth, of lowering taxes is a significant step forward. It addressed a
need that has been
[[Page S8407]]
there for almost 16 years as far as middle-income America is concerned.
The package that you helped fashion in the Finance Committee was not
only a significant step in support of lower taxes, but also boldly
addressed the need to reform Medicare and protect it for those who
depend upon it today, and those who will need it in the future.
Unfortunately, we were not able to hold those reforms in our conference
but I believe your action has put us on the road to reform. Thank you
and your staff for your support.
In addition to that, we praise the Finance Committee and its leader
Senator Roth for reforms in Medicare. The protection of that will
depend upon whether these reforms work and whether we are successful in
the future in a major reform package for Medicare.
Finally, to our leader, Senator Trent Lott. In short, Mr. President,
we would not be standing here today, about to pass this historic
balanced budget package, if not for the leadership, the support, and
the efforts of Trent Lott. As majority leader I don't believe a day has
gone by when he didn't take some action aimed at producing a balanced
budget for the American people. He has been direct, he has been
focused, and he has done everything you could ask a leader to do to get
us to this point. The American people should know, that this bipartisan
budget and tax relief package is due, in no small part, to his
determination, his drive, and his commitment. Mr. Leader, I thank you
for your leadership and your support.
I thank him for the support he has given me. I hope that I have been
of support and help to him as we move down this course of very
complicated negotiations as evidenced by the size of the bills we have
and the scope of what we are accomplishing.
Mr. President, I began this debate by quoting from a newspaper that
this agreement is a big deal. And, I believe it is. Because while it
has taken us 7 months to put this specific balanced budget and tax
relief package together, the pathway to this point has been years in
the making.
This legislation is a big deal because we have followed through on
our bipartisan commitment to implement the bipartisan budget agreement
reached in May. It is a big deal because it will balance the Federal
budget for the first time in 30 years. It is, in short, a great victory
for the American people who are entitled to expect of their adult
leaders that they work together in the best interests of our country.
For the past 2 years, many of my colleagues and I have insisted that
any budget passed through Congress be a balanced budget, one which is
fiscally responsible, reduces the deficit, protects our children,
provides much-needed tax relief for working American families, while
preserving and strengthening Medicare and encouraging economic growth.
The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 does just that.
It covers hundreds of Government programs; it has taken thousands of
man-hours to put together; it will help millions of our citizens; and
save billions and billions of dollars.
The budget we will vote on today is a big deal because it offers
America hope. But not only is this package a big deal it is also a good
deal.
It is a good deal because it is a budget designed to help American
families, to make them more secure--in their homes, in their
communities, in their jobs.
It offers them a more efficient government--one dedicated to economic
growth and security, support for our children, and lower taxes on
America's workers.
This budget is a good deal because it recognizes the simple notion
that our Government cannot simply go on borrowing and spending our
children's money. It will finally drive a stake through the heart of
the Deficit Dragon, and put an end to mounting Federal debt, a Medicare
system that will go bankrupt and a crushing tax burden on those just
starting out in life.
The budget is a good deal because it will strengthen America. It will
change the way our Government works--to make it more efficient, more
responsive, and less expensive. And, most importantly, it will ensure a
better future for our children and our Nation.
This budget is a good deal because it reflects our commitment to
fiscal responsibility, generating economic growth, creating good jobs
with a future, and protecting the American dream for all our citizens--
young and old alike.
This budget is a good deal because it will restore America's fiscal
equilibrium. It will reverse the tide of 50 years of power flowing for
the rest of the country to Washington. We want to provide more freedom
and opportunity to people at the local level so they might have more
control over the decisions on programs that effect their lives, their
children, and their communities.
This budget is a good deal because it recognizes the need to ease the
tax burden on America's middle-class working parents, to give them a
$500-per-child tax credit. This credit will help more than 50 million
American children in nearly 30 million families. Under this plan a
family with two children under age 17 would receive $1,000 in permanent
tax relief.
It's also a good deal for family farmers and small business men and
women; for homeowners who will someday sell their home; and for all
those who want to create incentives for economic growth and job
creation.
And, this budget is a good deal because while we are working toward
balance and tax relief, we continue to support programs which provide
needed services to our citizens and we have been painstakingly careful
to preserve a safety net for those in need.
To provide health care for poor children who have none. To strengthen
Medicare and provide more health care options for our seniors. To
improve access to higher education and help parents and our young
people pay for college.
We support programs aimed at keeping Americans safe--in their home,
schools, and neighborhoods--by funding needed crime programs.
The question whether one generation has the right to bind
another by the deficit it imposes is a question of such
consequence as to place it among the fundamental principles
of government. We should consider ourselves unauthorized to
saddle posterity with our debts and morally bound to pay them
ourselves.
Mr. President, we might wonder where that came from. Was that just a
statement here lately when our deficit and debt grew? No, it wasn't. It
was made by Thomas Jefferson. Thomas Jefferson was a wise man. He wrote
the Constitution. And he understood that if you pass on to the next
generation, and the next generation--as he calls it, posterity--the
debts of your generation, you take the chance that their life being
reasonable, good, prosperous, and successful is limited. It limits
their freedom. That is why we have been so worried about the debt, and
the annual deficit that contributes to it.
Today we will cast a vote of great significance to the future of
America. It is the vote so many of us have said we wanted--a vote to
finally balance the Federal budget.
One of freedoms great leaders Winston Churchill told us the ``price
of greatness is responsibility.'' We in government shoulder that
responsibility. We actively seek it by running for public office. I
believe the time has come to shoulder our responsibility and enact a
balanced Federal budget.
In doing so, we are casting a vote in support of America's future.
You may serve here for years and never cast a more important vote.
Because you now have a chance to vote to protect America, to strengthen
it, and improve it.
Today we can begin writing a new chapter in American history. That is
why this is a big deal and that is why it is a good deal.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a compilation of
extraneous provisions of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 be printed in
the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
EXTRANEOUS PROVISIONS--H.R. 2015--BALANCED BUDGET ACT OF 1997
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conference
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provision Comments/violation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title III--Communications and Spectrum Allocation
Section 3002(a)(1)(C)(iii)............ Requires FCC to set a reserve
price or minimum bid for
auctions, unless not in public
interest. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Section 3004-adds ``Sec. 337(e)(2)'' Directs FCC to consider needs of
and ``(f)(2)''. low-power television stations
in conducting transition to
digital TV, which the FCC is
already doing under current
law. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Title IV--Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Provisions
Sec. 4021............................. Medicare Commission. Byrd
rule(b)(1)(A): Produces no
change in outlays or revenues.
[[Page S8408]]
Sec. 4022............................. Authorization of the Medicare
Payment Advisory Commission.
Byrd rule(b)(1)(A): Produces no
change in outlays or revenues.
Sec................................... Study on Definition of
Homebound. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Sec................................... Study and Report on the Boren
Amendment. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Title V--Welfare and Related Provision
Sec. 5001(f).......................... Evaluations. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Sec. 5001(h).......................... Clarification that sanctions
against recipients under TANF
Program are not wage
reductions. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Sec. 5001(i).......................... GAO Study of effect of Family
Violence on Need for Public
Assistance. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Sec. 5002............................. Limitation on amount of Federal
Funds transferable to title XX
programs. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Sec. 5003............................. Limitation on number of persons
who may be engaged in work by
reason of participation. Byrd
rule(b)(1)(A): Produces no
change in outlays or revenues.
Sec. 5201............................. Clarification of authority to
permit certain redisclosures of
wage and claim information.
Byrd rule(b)(1)(A): Produces no
change in outlays or revenues.
Sec. 5408............................. State Program Integrity
Activities for Unemployment
Compensation. Byrd
rule(b)(1)(A): Produces no
change in outlays or revenues.
Sec. 5702............................. Authorization of appropriations
for enforcement initiatives
related to the earned income
credit. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Title VIII--Veterans and Related Provisions
Sec. 8023(a) 1729A(e)................. Report to Congress. Byrd
rule(b)(1)(A): Produces no
change in outlays or revenues.
Title X--Budget Enforcement and Process Provisions
Title X............................... Budget Enforcement and Process
Provisions. Byrd rule(b)(1)(A):
Produces no change in outlays
or revenues.
Title XI--District of Columbia Revitalization
Under Review.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I note the presence of our distinguished
majority leader. I wanted to reserve the remainder of the time for him.
I yield the floor.
I understand the minority party has about 10 minutes and we have
about 5 minutes for you, Mr. Leader.
Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. DOMENICI. 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. DOMENICI. Senator Lautenberg, is it your desire to yield the
remaining time to the majority leader?
Mr. LAUTENBERG. I will in just a couple minutes because I want us to
be able to hear from the leadership. I did not know whether or not
Senator Daschle had some remarks that he wanted to make, but I would
certainly be delighted to yield the time so that we apportion it with
the time remaining on the majority side, so that the distinguished
majority leader has the time that he needs to make his remarks. For the
moment, I would just say that we are not done yet, in the words of the
distinguished New Jersey philosopher Yogi Berra, who said, ``It's not
over `til it's over.'' We are getting ever closer. I don't yet feel the
attention that comes with championship bouts or things of that nature;
we have another 10 hours' worth of debate on the second part of the
reconciliation bill.
At this point, I would be happy to yield the time back that we have,
if the Parliamentarian could tell us how much time is remaining on our
side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 8 minutes remaining.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Eight minutes. If I were to give up 5 minutes of that
time, how much combined time would the majority leader have?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. A total of 8 minutes. The majority has 5
minutes.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. We will yield 5 and you have 5 so that the majority
leader can have 10 minutes.
Senator Daschle is on his way, and I know he would like to have a
couple words, so we can extend the time if we need for just a couple of
minutes.
I yield the floor.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I indicated last Saturday on a radio show
that if we could get this answer to the American people's prayers this
week, I would whistle ``Hail to the Chief'' in the Senate.
Well, the rules do not allow that. I am afraid that Senator Byrd
would come down and chastise me if I whistle, but let me tell you I am
humming ``Hail to the Chief'' to the American people today because we
have accomplished an awful lot in reaching the agreement on these two
major bills.
I was reading an article last night entitled, ``O Ye of Little
Faith,'' and it made me think about what we have gone through the last
few weeks. I just have to ask the Senate this morning, how many of us
really, really thought we were going to get this done and that we were
going to get it done this week? Even 1 week ago there were those who
were saying, ``Oh, no, you can't get that done before we go out for the
August recess. Wait until September; we will do it then.''
But we persisted. We just kept saying we can get through this. We can
do this together. We can do the right thing for the American people,
and we can do it now, because it has been a long time coming.
I think it is appropriate that on both sides of the aisle and both
ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, Republicans and Democrats, House and
Senate, and, yes, the President, all are saying this is good for
America.
It is not utopia. It does not solve all the problems. There are some
things in here I do not like. There are some things in here that the
Senator from New Jersey does not like. But it is a major step forward--
maybe not a leap but a major step forward. We are doing some things we
promised the American people, things that really matter. It matters
that we are going to get to a balanced budget, and this time it is with
honest numbers. We are really going to do it. And for a lot of reasons
we may do it before the year 2002. This is the type of commitment that
I have not seen in the Congress in a bipartisan way in the 25 years
that I have had the honor of serving the people of Mississippi. So I
think we should declare this is a very important step forward. It is
worth having.
I was doing an interview yesterday and somebody said: Well, not
enough in the tax bill, not enough tax relief. Why wasn't there more?
Why didn't you insist on this? Why didn't you insist on that?
I have a simple question. Is some tax relief better than no tax
relief? There are those who would rather have nothing if they cannot
get everything. Ladies and gentlemen, my colleagues in the Senate,
these bills are worth having. I am proud to say that I worked on it for
8 months of my life. This past Saturday night and Sunday morning, I
thought we had lost it. I was boiling inside. I was disturbed. I was
hurt that we were going to let this moment get away from us. But I
guess maybe after a Sunday morning of reflection and prayer, we said,
no, we are going to do this. And so we did. The President made a
commitment. He wanted to get it done. The leadership in the Congress,
House and Senate, Republican and Democrat, wanted to get it done, and
that is why we just did it. We went ahead and did it.
Let me say to my colleagues here today, there are so many I want to
thank and congratulate for this step forward, but I have to begin with
the distinguished Senator from New Mexico. None of us has worked
longer, none of us has contributed more, none of us knows more about
what is in this bill than Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico. He has
been my confidante. He has been my trusted ally. He has done this when,
in his own personal life, he has had problems to worry about. And so I
know that the President, the Democrats and Republicans on both sides of
the aisle, want to say thanks a lot, Pete. You did a great job for your
country.
His colleague on the other side of the aisle, Senator Lautenberg,
could have walked away from this. Even at the last moment, something he
cares about tremendously, guaranteeing we get the Amtrak funds--it is
in there, but with a condition--he could have said, if I can't get what
I want, I am not going to do this.
He is not going to do that. He is going to do what is right for his
State and the country.
My colleague, Tom Daschle, from South Dakota, yesterday said some
very nice things about my efforts, and I have to say the same about
him. He was reliable. He was honest with me. He stayed the course. He
came to the meetings. There were some meetings he didn't get to come
to. A lot of people had an opportunity to get their egos hurt, but
everybody rose above it.
[[Page S8409]]
Pat Moynihan, Finance Committee, bipartisan effort. We reported one
of these bills, I think it was 18 to 2, the other one 20 to nothing,
out of the Finance Committee, but it began with Bill Roth, the chairman
of the Finance Committee, and the Senator from New York. They made up
their minds they were going to get it done, and they were going to do
it together, and the rest of us could come along if we wanted. Our
scholar Senator helped lead the way.
I have to say again about Bill Roth, patience, tenacity, he was not
going to relent on getting this job done. And the Finance Committee had
both of these bills. No other committee in Congress had to do it that
way. In the House, it was Ways and Means and Commerce Committee as well
as Budget. Over here, it was just Budget and Finance. He did a great
job. We would not have what we have in the tax bill on IRA's; we would
not have what we have on Amtrak; we would not have what we were able to
get on a myriad of issues in this legislation. He did a fantastic job.
I could go on down the list, but it truly is a bipartisan effort, and
I am proud of that. Some people say, ``Why don't you draw the line and
fight?'' I have done that. Sometimes it is fun, but it doesn't produce
anything but a fight most of the time.
So there will be another day to differentiate between the parties,
but today we are going to do what is right for the country. This bill
is rightly called the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. It contains
literally hundreds of positions that will get us to that balanced
budget. But the bottom line is, it is something the American people
have been waiting to hear for many years. We will have a balanced
budget by the year 2002 and thereafter.
How is that accomplished? Well, it does have spending reductions of
approximately $270 billion over 5 years. It has $140 billion in
restraint on appropriated accounts. It has $132 billion in entitlements
and net interest savings. It does provide help for children's health,
and that is a bipartisan effort.
Most of us are parents. Most of us have children in our States who
are not covered. We disagree about how much we should pay for it, how
much should be done, but it is something we care about and we should
do. And we get it done in this bill.
Now, we give as much flexibility as we can to the States, and that is
the way it should be. I have faith in my own Governor and my own
legislature. I want these decisions to be made as close to the people
that need this help, as close to the children as possible. What they
need in West Virginia may be different from what they need in Arizona.
Give that flexibility so that the decisions are close to the people and
so it is provided in a way that will really provide the help it should.
I want to make this important point about Medicare. We are going to
improve Medicare. We are going to save Medicare from going insolvent
for another several years at way out to, I believe, close to the year
2007 probably, and we are going to do it with flexibility. We are going
to give the seniors a chance to choose. They can go with the old
system; they can go with an HMO; they can go with a professional
services organization; they can have medical savings accounts.
We have done what we have been arguing about for 4 years. We are
actually doing it. We are doing what we said we were going to do in
Medicare and that alone, what we are doing in Medicare alone is worth
voting for this legislation. What other problems you may have with this
bill--some of the changes in welfare, I think, go the wrong direction;
we really want to get people from welfare to work. This bill has some
problems, but just the Medicare provision makes it worthwhile.
We have some savings in Medicaid. The States will have a greater
ability to deliver health services more efficiently for poor persons.
When you look through the list of things that we have done here, in
instance after instance, I think we should be very proud.
I am here today to tell you that I am going to vote for this
legislation with pride, not with fear and trepidation, not with
reservations or grumpiness because I didn't get everything I wanted,
but because the process worked. Our system of Government worked here
like I think our forefathers intended for it to work, and we are going
to produce genuine results that will be of benefit. In this bill and in
the other bill we will pass for our children our educational system in
America, child health care, the guarantee of the important programs
that we want for our seniors. From the day we are born to the day we
die, there will be benefits coming out of this legislation.
So I urge my colleagues, let us make this an overwhelming vote. I
think we will have as near to a unanimous vote as you will ever get in
the Senate on a bill of this magnitude, a bill of this size. I think
when we vote on it, it is going to pass overwhelmingly. Then we are
going to go to the tax relief package, which I am tremendously excited
about.
I am glad to have been a part of this effort. It has been worthwhile.
It has been long. It has been tedious. It has tried my patience. I lost
my temper a few times, along with others, and for those occasions I
apologize. But we got it done, and we will have more decisions made by
the people at the State level; we will have genuine tax relief; we will
have security for our seniors, and now and then we can move on and
address other problems that we need to take up for the future of our
country.
I thank the Chair and I thank all Senators for what you have done on
this.
Mr. DOMENICI. Will the Senator yield for 30 seconds?
Mr. LOTT. I yield to the great senior Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I believe we have an opportunity to
write a new chapter in American history, and I am very proud to be part
of it, and I thank the Senator for his kind words.
Mr. LOTT. It would not have happened without the Senator from New
Mexico, and I thank him once again for all of his long hours and great
leadership.
(Mr. SMITH of Oregon assumed the Chair.)
Mr. MOYNIHAN. Will the leader yield for 30 seconds?
Mr. LOTT. I will yield to the Senator from New York.
Mr. MOYNIHAN. Might I thank him on behalf of Senator Roth, who is not
present at the moment, for his very generous remarks about the Finance
Committee, of which he is a member--not hardly the least of us. It is
true that the overwhelming portion of both these measures fell to the
Finance Committee, and we voted nearly, in one case, a unanimous
measure, on one bill we are about to vote on, 18 to 2, the bill we are
going to take up.
I think that has contributed considerably to the momentum that has
surrounded us and brought us to this moment. I thank the distinguished
majority leader for his generous remarks.
Mr. LOTT. I thank the Senator from New York.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, do we have any time left here?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 3 minutes.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. If the majority leader will yield?
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I am glad to yield the floor to the Senator
from New Jersey.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. We will try to split the time. I want to say, also,
to the majority leader, thank you for the accolades and for the
encouragement that you gave Senator Domenici and me throughout the
process and for the comments about our other colleagues, all of whom
worked diligently, worked honestly on getting the mission accomplished.
At times, I can tell you that Senator Domenici--it's no secret--would
kind of lay down the book and say, ``We have to check this upstairs.''
I don't think he meant all the way up. I think he meant only as far as
the majority leader's office. Or, ``We have to turn to the
leadership.'' I would do the same thing.
But persistence was the keynote, persistence and patience. I want to
say this about the majority leader and about the way he has conducted
things. Serving in the minority, it's easy to find fault with the
majority leader. But one has to give credit where due. The fact is that
this majority leader has, with diligence and persistence, moved
legislation through this place. He has come up to me, and I am sure
other colleagues, and said, ``Frank, let's try to make sense out of
this. What is it that you are trying to accomplish? Can
[[Page S8410]]
it be done this time? Well, I don't think so. I think we can get
halfway there, I think we can get three-quarters of the way.'' Or he'll
say, ``That's not a bad idea and I do want to help you with that.'' And
he made a commitment with me on trying to make sure our national
passenger rail system keeps on functioning. He reaffirmed his
commitment to help find a way to get that done.
So I want to say, relatively, as we say around here--looking around
here, looking at my white hair, I can say it comfortably--the new kid
on the block, the majority leader, has done a good job. It's
particularly evident when we look at the accomplishment of this piece
of legislation, the one we are about to pass. And he is right; it's
going to pass overwhelmingly. We want to have as many people on both
sides say yes as we can, to indicate to the American people that we
believe in this assignment that we took on.
So, I thank the majority leader for his skill, his patience, and his
persistence. I think he helped calm the waters a little bit. Because I
don't remember, throughout the 7 or 8 months of discussion, often late
at night, often without lunch, munchies, or otherwise, that the
patience--the tempers never really got real hot. Am I right? Pete, once
in a while, you know, would stamp on the floor or something like that,
but he would come right back, bouncing up. We pushed our way through.
So I thank everybody involved in the effort, and I am delighted to be
here, to serve in this place and serve at a time like this when we have
accomplished something.
Mr. DOMENICI. Would the Senator yield for a minute?
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Yes.
Mr. DOMENICI. You know that little hideaway, the Domenici hideaway
with that great view? I think when we are finished, we are going to put
a plaque in there; right? It's not mine anymore. But it's going to say,
``In this little room this budget agreement was hatched and
completed.''
Mr. LAUTENBERG. May I add a word of poetry?
We stood and looked away,
Hoping for some accomplishment at the end of this day.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired. The question is on the
conference report.
Mr. DOMENICI. We don't have the yeas and nays yet. 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 the conference report. The
yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced, yeas 85, nays 15, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 209 Leg.]
YEAS--85
Abraham
Akaka
Baucus
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Boxer
Breaux
Brownback
Bryan
Bumpers
Burns
Byrd
Campbell
Chafee
Cleland
Cochran
Collins
Conrad
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
Daschle
DeWine
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Durbin
Feingold
Feinstein
Frist
Glenn
Gorton
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Harkin
Hatch
Hutchinson
Hutchison
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnson
Kempthorne
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Kyl
Landrieu
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lieberman
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murkowski
Murray
Nickles
Reed
Reid
Robb
Roberts
Rockefeller
Roth
Santorum
Sarbanes
Shelby
Smith (OR)
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Thurmond
Torricelli
Warner
Wyden
NAYS--15
Allard
Ashcroft
Coats
Enzi
Faircloth
Ford
Gramm
Grams
Helms
Hollings
Inhofe
Sessions
Smith (NH)
Thompson
Wellstone
The conference report was agreed to.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. COATS. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair.
The VICE PRESIDENT. The Senator from Arkansas is recognized.
____________________