[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 142 (Tuesday, October 21, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10877-S10878]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ISTEA AND CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I notice that we are in a situation today
that is no different than the circumstances we found ourselves in
before we left for the recess last week, and that is the bill that is
on the floor of the Senate is the highway reauthorization bill, or
ISTEA. Most people want to get some progress made on that piece of
legislation.
I might say to the Senator from Rhode Island and the Senator from
Montana who are managing that bill, I think they have done an
extraordinary job with that bill and I support what they have done. I
very much want the Senate to be able to complete its work on the
highway reauthorization bill.
I also am someone who believes that if the Senate leaves after this
first session of Congress without having dealt with the underlying bill
of the campaign finance reform issue, more specifically, McCain-
Feingold, we will not have done what we should do for the American
people on that issue. It is clear we have a serious problem in campaign
finance. It ought not be lost on the American people. I am sure it is
not. We have a system here that is broken. There is money ricocheting
around every crevice of this political system.
There was a story in one of the newspapers today, some new groups are
coming together, suggesting each of the organizations and groups
contribute a million dollars so they can do new independent campaign
expenditures. The fact is there is all this money ricocheting around
the political system, and it ought not be lost on anybody that this
system is broken and needs fixing.
How do we fix it? There are a number of different ideas, but the
McCain-Feingold is one that has been worked on and a lot of time has
been spent on that proposal. At least we ought to have the opportunity
for a vote on the McCain-Feingold proposal. We were told prior to
bringing the highway reauthorization bill to the floor of the Senate
that we would debate campaign finance reform. In fact, it was on the
floor of the Senate for some long while, but we never got to a vote on
the substance of campaign finance reform because all we did was talk
and talk and talk, and then it was pulled from the floor before there
was an opportunity for a vote.
That is our dilemma. We have kind of a self-imposed set of
circumstances here where shackles have been allied in this legislative
process so that, first, we can't get a vote on campaign finance reform,
and, second, we have the highway reauthorization bill on the floor
which we need to pass--it is a good bill, incidentally, which we need
to pass--but it is brought to the floor with a Byzantine kind of
structure in which the parliamentary tree is filled with amendments and
second degrees and they have done what is called fill the tree so that
no one else can offer any amendments on this legislation. So we find
ourselves in a circumstance where we have gridlock, a self-imposed
gridlock, because some are worried that we will force a vote on
campaign finance reform--a vote, incidentally, I think the American
people would like to see us have. So the result is they take a bill
such as the highway reauthorization and load it up by filling the tree
so that you can't do anything on that, either.
Now, I am thinking that perhaps later this afternoon I should come
over--I guess what we have is a tree filled and the last amendment is a
second-degree amendment--and maybe I should ask for the yeas and nays
on the second-degree amendment. I think the yeas and nays would be in
order on the second-degree amendment, so perhaps in order to try to end
this gridlock, we ought to at least ask for the yeas and nays on the
second-degree amendment.
In fact, let me just say for the record, the second-degree amendment
as constructed by Senator Lott, the majority leader, is one I will
support. So if we get the yeas and nays, and I will vote for it,
presumably a number of Members of the Senate would vote for it
sufficient for it to pass, and then at that point the tree isn't full
and people can come out here and offer amendments. Then we have one of
two opportunities to do business: Either someone can come to the floor
and offer an amendment to try to get a vote on McCain-Feingold, the
campaign finance reform bill that will reform the campaign finance
system, or someone can come to the floor and offer an amendment on the
highway reauthorization act.
Either of those alternatives is preferable to the circumstance we now
find ourselves in. It does no service to the Senate to say, first, we
don't want to vote on campaign finance reform, so second, we will bring
the ISTEA bill or highway reauthorization to the floor of the Senate
and then tie it up with the same rope that we used to tie up campaign
finance reform so that we are not able to move on either.
I again observe perhaps the approach should be for one of us, perhaps
myself or someone else, to come over this afternoon and ask for the
yeas and nays. I assume we can find enough friends to come and get a
sufficient second, and at some point we can get the yeas and nays on
the second-degree amendment, which is the lowest hanging fruit on this
bitter tree that has been constructed, and at that point maybe we can
offer some other amendments. My first choice would be campaign finance
reform, get a vote on that and move on, but if it is not that, at least
other amendments, so we can make progress on what I think is a very
good highway reauthorization bill.
I began by complimenting the Senator from Montana. He was not here,
and the Senator from Rhode Island, I don't know if he heard, but you
have brought a bill to the floor of the Senate that is an
extraordinarily good bill. I like this piece of legislation. This
country needs your legislation. I think the country will be better
served by having the Senate pass it and going to conference and getting
more than a 6-month extension that seems to be the mood on the other
side. To the extent we move this bill and put in law some very good
legislation, the country will be best served.
In order to get to that point, however, we have to find a way to
untie this whole process, first on ISTEA, especially on ISTEA, saying
let's bring
[[Page S10878]]
the highway reauthorization bill to the floor and tie it up so nobody
can move and then also on campaign finance reform. On campaign finance
reform we all know the American people want us to at least vote on that
issue. They don't want people to be involved in parliamentary
maneuvering sufficient so you don't get an up-or-down vote on a bill
that a good number of Members of this Senate have worked on for many,
many, many months.
Mr. President, I will not do so now, but I say that if we have what
is called a legislative tree filled with first- and second-degree
amendments sufficient so that no one else in the Senate is able to move
at all on anything, perhaps what we ought to do is take that bottom
second-degree amendment, which I support and I expect the ranking
member and the chairman would support, and let's vote on that. Let's
have a vote on it. I will vote for it, we will pass it, and we will
open a spot, and then let's do the business of either the highway
reauthorization bill or any other amendment that one may wish to bring
to the floor of the Senate, which might include on behalf of some the
campaign finance reform proposal.
That is the only way, it seems to me, that we would be able to get
the Senate to begin moving. It probably can only be considered
sufficient to Members of a body that understand these rules to believe
somehow you make progress when the lights are on and the heat is on.
But there is no thoughtful discussion about an issue that allows you to
make progress because we have the thing tied in knots. That is not
something that would be sufficient to the rest of the American people.
Let me finish by saying again that we have a very important bill on
the floor of the Senate right now. I want to be helpful in moving that
piece of legislation, but it is not moving. It hasn't moved a
centimeter. We have made no progress at all since the moment it was
brought to the floor of the Senate, except for some statements. Why?
Because some people are afraid that campaign finance reform will be
brought to the floor as an amendment and be voted on and they don't
want to have a vote on campaign finance reform, so they tie up the
highway reauthorization.
Let's find a way to untie all of us. Let's have our votes up or down.
However they come out, they come out. We don't waive those here. We
just count them. Let's have them and decide where the votes are. In
fact, prior to the highway reauthorization bill being brought to the
floor and the cloture vote, it looks to me like there is probably
sufficient numbers of Senators who would vote for McCain-Feingold to
enact legislation of that type. It appears to me that there are over 50
votes in the Senate for that. But because we couldn't get past the
cloture vote we couldn't get to it.
That is part of the purpose, I assume, with tying the Senate up with
this procedural tree. But I guess it would be appropriate for a Member
of the Senate to ask for the yeas and nays on the underlying second-
degree amendment. I would certainly consider doing that later this
afternoon, if that is what is available to us, and if that might get us
off dead center and allow us to open up a slot either to do this bill,
or for someone to come over and offer some other amendment of their
choice.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Inhofe). The Senator from Rhode Island.
____________________