[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 117 (Tuesday, September 8, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9950-S9951]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      PRIVATE AND PUBLIC MORALITY

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I hope all my colleagues had a good Labor 
Day at home with their constituents. I want to say that I had the real 
pleasure of being with hundreds of people all over the great State of 
California with the Lieutenant Governor this Labor Day. And it was very 
uplifting to be with the people who are moving our country forward, 
because every day they get up and put one foot in front of the other, 
and they work, they take care of their families, and they build this 
country.
  So it was, indeed, a very good day, and I think a day that gave a lot 
of us perspective as to why we are here and what our real interests 
should be in terms of making sure that this economic expansion 
continues, and that every child, regardless of station, has a chance at 
the American dream.
  Mr. President, last week, Senator Lieberman made a very thoughtful 
speech on the Senate floor in which he expressed his ``deep 
disappointment and personal anger'' concerning the President's improper 
behavior.
  Senator Lieberman then laid out the process by which the Senate can 
go on record in an official expression of disapproval.
  When I was asked how I felt about that, I expressed agreement with 
Senator Lieberman and with his understanding of the options that are 
before this body.
  I would like to reiterate today what I have said about this matter 
since January. At that time I put my faith in the process, which I said 
would lead to the truth. The process is in fact leading to the truth, 
and the process is continuing.
  In 1983, when I served in the House of Representatives, we had such a 
process in place when I voted to censure two colleagues--one a Democrat 
and one a Republican--for relationships that involved interns; we had a 
process in place in 1990, again, when a House colleague was reprimanded 
for his conduct.
  Unfortunately, we did not have such a process in place in 1991, when 
a Supreme Court nominee was about to be confirmed with not so much as a 
look at allegations of sexual harassment. And in 1995, the integrity of 
the Senate process was being compromised to keep such charges by 18 
women secret, rather than following the normal course of open public 
hearings. We also learned that the military routinely ignored similar 
complaints.
  So despite the difficulty of all of those incidents--and they were 
all very difficult--I am proud that many women in Congress have worked 
to make sure that improper relationships in the

[[Page S9951]]

workplace are no longer swept under the rug. We certainly know about 
the President's relationship. It was wrong. It was indefensible, and as 
Senator Lieberman has said, the relationship was immoral. The President 
has now agreed with that assessment. I fervently wish he had seen it 
that way before the relationship started. And in any case, he should 
have taken responsibility much earlier.
  This President has led us out of the worst recession since the Great 
Depression. He has led us to a balanced budget--the first one in 30 
years. And in my home State we have seen 1.4 million new jobs, 100,000 
new businesses, and a decline in crime of 28 percent.
  I will always be grateful to the President for his visionary public 
policy in so many areas, and so will the people of California. I 
fervently hope that while the process moves forward we can continue to 
work with President Clinton to keep the country moving in the right 
direction. The people want us to do that, and I think we should do 
that.
  I don't believe there are differences in this body about the 
immorality of the President's relationship with an intern.
  As I said, the President himself agreed with Senator Lieberman's 
comments.
  We have a process in place to deal with the President's morality as 
it relates to an improper relationship. I would like to ask us today to 
also set our agenda to deal with public policy morality.
  I want to explain what I mean by that.
  Is it moral for an HMO to deny a child desperately needing care?
  I spoke at a press conference the other day about one of my 
constituents, a little girl, who is undergoing chemotherapy treatment. 
She is very sick and she has severe nausea and vomiting from the 
procedure. The HMO denied the parents $54 for a prescription to take 
away her nausea and vomiting while the CEO of that company was drawing 
down tens of millions of dollars in salary. I don't think that is 
moral.
  I want to see us pass a Patients' Bill of Rights with teeth in it to 
deal with that.
  Is it moral that 14 children every day die from gunshot wounds in 
America? Fourteen children every day. Let's pass sensible gun laws that 
do not infringe on people's rights but make our country safer.
  Is it moral not to fund three out of four approved NIH grants? That 
is what happens today. The NIH budget is squeezed. We need to do more. 
Our people are sick. They worry about cancer, Alzheimer's--all the 
diseases that plague us today. Let's double the Federal commitment to 
help research within the context of a balanced budget, and then tell 
our people we are doing all we can. That would be the moral thing to 
do.
  Is it moral for special interests to give unlimited funds of money to 
a political campaign? We could stop that. Let's pass the McCain-
Feingold campaign finance reform laws. That would help solve the 
problem.
  Is it moral to have children attending schools where ceiling tiles 
fall on their heads?
  I just visited such a school in Sacramento--an old school. I had to 
run out of there literally choking on the must and the mildew in the 
room. We need an education plan to help all of our children learn.
  Is it moral to leave our kids at home in empty houses or to join 
gangs because they are so lonely after school? We know the juvenile 
crime rate goes just straight up like this after school, and we know 
that afterschool programs work. Let's pass a program at least to fund 
500 of those afterschool programs.
  So my point today is this: In the Senate and in our own way we must 
strive for private morality, and we also should strive for public 
morality.
  Mr. President, we have so much work to do. But I know we can do good 
things for the people of this country if we have the will to move 
forward to address the many moral questions facing us--the moral 
questions on the private side, and the moral questions on the public 
side.
  So, again, as we reflect on the situation as it confronts us, let's 
remember to do our best on both sides of the equation--private 
morality, absolutely; and public morality, absolutely.
  Thank you very much, Mr. President.
  I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. ROBERTS). The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 12 
o'clock will be under the control of the distinguished Senator from 
Utah, Mr. Hatch, and the distinguished Senator from Iowa, Mr. Grassley.

                          ____________________