[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 156 (Saturday, November 8, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12075-S12077]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              SENATE HOLDS

  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to take a few minutes to 
discuss the effort here in the Senate to eliminate the secrecy with 
which the Senate so often conducts business. Through a procedure that 
certainly isn't known to most Americans, it is possible for one U.S. 
Senator to unilaterally block this Senate from considering a piece of 
legislation or a nomination. This process is known as a hold. Certainly 
as we have seen in the last few days, a hold is an extraordinary power 
in the last few hours of a session in the U.S. Senate. In fact, it is 
fair to say in the last few hours of a session, a hold is essentially 
unbeatable.
  Now, originally a hold was intended as a courtesy to a Senator. If 
the Senator couldn't be present at a particular time--there was an 
illness in the family, this sort of thing--they could put a hold on a 
measure or nomination, and that way, as a courtesy, the Senate would 
make sure it was brought up shortly thereafter when that Senator could 
be there.
  But what has happened over the years is that the hold has been 
abused. At one point here fairly recently there were more than 40 holds 
on individuals, nominees, pieces of legislation, and it was all done in 
secret--all of it. At a time when the American people are so skeptical 
of the way business is done in Washington, DC, and so often 
understandably skeptical, the secret hold, the unilateral power of one 
Senator to block a bill or nomination and do it all

[[Page S12076]]

in secret is something that is being abused, and abused especially at 
the end of a session of the U.S. Senate.
  Senator Grassley and I, on a bipartisan basis, have tried to 
eliminate the secrecy that surrounds these holds. We have said we are 
not quarreling with the proposition of a Member of the U.S. Senate to 
have this extraordinary power. Members of the Senate, under all other 
circumstances, are accountable to their constituents. But in this case 
they aren't accountable because they can exercise this power in secret.
  Senator Grassley and I offered what we don't think is exactly a 
radical idea, which is that when a Senator uses this power, it would be 
publicly disclosed. We said if a Senator uses this power, they should 
have to disclose the use of that hold in the Congressional Record 
within 48 hours of exercising their hold. That way, the U.S. Senate 
would know who is exercising this power, the American people would know 
who is exercising this power. If a Member of the U.S. Senate is doing 
the bidding of a powerful set of interests, it would be possible for 
everybody to know what exactly was taking place. So Senator Grassley 
and I were able in the last weeks of the session to attach an anti-
Senate-secrecy amendment so that when the use of the hold is applied, 
the American people would know who was blocking this body from 
considering a bill or nomination.
  Now, as I understand it, there are discussions underway, in effect 
behind closed doors, behind closed doors without public debate, there 
is discussion of dropping an effort to end Senate secrecy. I will tell 
you, that doesn't pass the smell test. Killing a plan to end Senate 
secrecy behind closed doors isn't the way this body ought to be doing 
business. Certainly what we have seen in the last few weeks since 
Senator Grassley and I prevailed on our proposal here in the Senate to 
end secrecy, is that there has been an explosive proliferation of the 
use of holds once again. There are countless bills and nominations that 
certainly deserve consideration. You can argue whether they deserve 
majority support, but they certainly deserve open debate, and they 
can't be brought to this floor because one Senator has secretly said 
no. One Senator has secretly said, ``No, I will not allow discussion'' 
of that particular topic.
  The irony of all of this, Mr. President, is that often even Senators 
don't know when a hold has been placed in their name. I have had a 
number of Senators tell me since I've come to the Senate that they have 
been approached about holds. They were told they had a hold on a 
measure. It turned out the staff had put a hold on it without their 
even knowing about it. So it is one thing for an elected official, a 
Member of the U.S. Senate with an election certificate to exercise this 
extraordinary power; it is quite another to have those who are not 
elected exercise it. It highlights, again, how much this process has 
been abused of late.
  I thought that the minority leader, Senator Daschle, captured the 
spirit of this situation the other day in his morning briefing with the 
press. Amid what reads on the transcript like pretty raucous laughter, 
the minority leader walked reporters through the variety of holds that 
there were on dozens of nominees at that time. In fact, he said, ``If 
you don't have a hold, you ought to feel lonesome.'' The minority 
leader was pressed by reporters about who might be placing some of the 
holds, but the minority leader said he didn't know who was placing 
these holds. Some have said eventually you can find out who is 
exercising the hold. But I can tell my colleagues here in the U.S. 
Senate that even the minority leader is on record as saying he doesn't 
know who is placing these secret holds.
  This secrecy, in my view, Mr. President, is not in keeping with the 
proud traditions of the U.S. Senate, and it is not in keeping with the 
fundamental spirit of openness and accountability that is at the heart 
of our democratic process. I sought to serve in the U.S. Senate because 
I wanted to be in a position to influence policy on issues that are 
important to Oregonians and the people of this country. I value the 
extraordinary opportunity that I have been given by my constituents to 
serve and to use the power that they have given me on behalf of them 
and the American people. But it is time to say that power must be 
accompanied by responsibility. That responsibility is to be straight 
with the American people, to tell them about the actions and the 
policies that they are taking. It certainly is not in line with the 
spirit of openness and accountability for the American people to allow 
one Senator in secret to unilaterally block from this floor even the 
consideration of a bill or nomination.
  I am one who simply feels that public business ought to be done in 
public. Some might think that is a little bit quaint at this time in 
American history. But I think it is time to bring some sunshine to the 
process for debating these issues. I am very proud and very grateful 
that Senator Grassley has joined me in this effort. I think it is very 
unfortunate that there appears now to be an effort behind closed doors 
to kill our proposal to end Senate secrecy. That will be unfortunate if 
it takes place. If it takes place, I want every Member of the U.S. 
Senate to know that Senator Grassley and I will be back on this floor 
pressing the case again.
  It's not going to threaten the deliberative approach that this body 
rightly takes to consideration of issues, to have openness and 
accountability in the way that the Senate does business. Senator 
Grassley and I aren't saying get rid of the hold; we are not saying the 
hold ought to be abolished and a power that a Senator now has be 
diminished. We are simply saying that power should be accompanied by 
responsibility. Rights should be accompanied by responsibility.
  Now, I was very gratified when the proposal Senator Grassley and I 
offered in the U.S. Senate was approved by this body. I have been 
appreciative of the fact that the Senate majority leader, Trent Lott, 
has been willing to work with me on this matter and has indicated that 
he certainly doesn't want to see Senate secrecy and see important 
decisions made without accountability. And I felt that the Senate was 
moving in the right direction when, initially, our proposal was voted 
on, and favorably so, by the U.S. Senate.
  But I am concerned that the bill that will come before the Senate, 
the D.C. appropriations bill, will not contain the legislation that 
Senator Grassley and I offered to end Senate secrecy. I am concerned 
that our proposal may just disappear behind closed doors, without any 
public debate, without any explanation at all, and that our proposal 
may be put aside with the very secrecy that we sought to end.
  So I tell my colleagues, Mr. President, that this fight is not going 
to end today. The D.C. appropriations bill is an important part of the 
Senate's work and it needs to be completed. But this Senator wants to 
be clear that we will be back, and we will be back, in my view, with 
even more support from the American people, given the fact that, in 
recent weeks, there were more than 40 holds--40 holds--on nominees and 
individual pieces of legislation, and even the Senate minority leader 
could not tell the American people who was exercising those holds.
  Mr. President, it's time for additional openness and accountability 
in the U.S. Senate. In my view, continuing these secret practices 
cheapens the currency of democracy. The Senate can maintain its proud 
traditions with having openness and accountability, and each Member of 
the U.S. Senate will still be able to fight for their constituents and 
do the work they were sent here to do.
  So I am still hopeful that the D.C. appropriations bill, when it 
comes back, will contain the legislation that Senator Grassley and I 
authored to end the secrecy in the way business is done in the Senate. 
But if it's not, if our provision is not, I want to assure the Members 
of the U.S. Senate that we will be back, we will be back on a 
bipartisan basis. I don't believe it's possible for any Senator, at a 
town hall meeting in their home State, to justify these secret holds. I 
don't think it passes the smell test. I think it's wrong. If we don't 
prevail on it today, Mr. President, we will be back.
  I yield the floor.
  Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois [Ms. Moseley-Braun] 
is recognized.
  Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed 
as in morning business for 10 minutes.

[[Page S12077]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________