[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.

                          ____________________