[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 144 (Monday, October 12, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12369-S12372]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           THE 105TH CONGRESS

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, let me say at the outset to my friend from 
North Dakota, whom I served with in the House of Representatives, he 
has been not only our floor manager of debate during the course of this 
105th Congress, but he has also been an active leader for his State. 
The leadership he showed along with Senator Conrad, as well as Senators 
Daschle and Johnson of South Dakota, during the crisis that faced their 
States earlier when they dealt with floods and fires--it seems like all 
the furies at once--was the type of leadership that is extraordinary, 
and I thank him for that.

  I know we are going to have even more discussion in the days ahead 
about the current agricultural crisis in his State. I see his 
colleague, Senator Conrad, on the floor and I know that they are going 
to carefully monitor the debate going on now about an omnibus spending 
bill to try to do their best to help struggling farmers in their 
State--and, I add, in my State of Illinois, which has its own share of 
difficulties.
  I have brought to the floor here a volume, which those of us in the 
Senate know very well, and perhaps those in the gallery may recognize, 
and those at home may find new. It is ``The History of the U.S. 
Senate'' compiled by one of our colleagues here, Senator Robert Byrd. 
He is the preeminent Senate historian. He has written this history to 
try to capture what the Senate means and what it has meant to the 
United States. I have seen it several times, and I have read portions 
of it. I am determined that I am going to finish it from cover to cover 
soon. I looked through it to try to remember if there was another 
Senate that you could point to that was parallel to what we are seeing 
here today.
  This is the conclusion of my first 2 years in the U.S. Senate, 
representing my home State of Illinois. Prior to that, I served for 14 
years in the House of Representatives. I am no stranger to Capitol 
Hill, but I am a newcomer to this body. I am surprised that I stand 
here today on October 12, some 12 days into the new fiscal year, and 
say that we are still here. We were supposed to be gone, supposed to 
have finished our

[[Page S12370]]

work and gone home. Unfortunately, we have not.
  As the Senator from North Dakota indicated, there is a great deal 
still being debated. The size and scope of this debate is mind-
boggling--that we would be talking at this moment about still having 
unresolved questions concerning about a third to a half of the Federal 
budget that we appropriate.
  How can we be in on October 12 still talking about these things? It 
is because several things have occurred, which are not historic and not 
in a positive way. This Congress, this House and this Senate, under 
Republican leadership, failed to pass a budget resolution for the first 
time in 24 years. So what? Well, the budget resolution is supposed to 
be the game plan--not the President's game plan, but Congress' game 
plan--of how we will spend money and reach certain budgetary goals, as 
well as policy goals.
  I can recall, in the 16 years I have been on the Hill, that there 
were long and arduous and heated debates about our goals. We would get 
them out of the way and pass the budget resolution, usually around the 
date it was due, which is April 15. Does that date ring a bell with 
people in the gallery? We all meet our obligation to pay our taxes on 
April 15. Congress was supposed to meet its obligation to pass a budget 
resolution by April 15, but it failed. It has now failed for almost 6 
months.
  A great deal of blame has been assigned to the President for this 
mess that we are in today in the 105th Congress. But any honest 
appraisal suggests that the President had nothing to do with the budget 
resolution. That was Congress' responsibility. The President doesn't 
even sign it. It is a resolution, not a law. The House passes it, the 
Senate passes another, they come to conference and agree, and then set 
out to spend the money. And they never could agree. The Republican 
House and the Republican Senate could not reach an agreement between 
them, and here we are today. That is unfortunate. Eight to ten of our 
appropriations bills have not been passed.
  We are still working on theories and concepts when we should be 
wrapping things up and going home. We are going to pass stopgap 
spending measures to try to keep the Government going while we reach an 
agreement that should have started back on April 15.
  I would like to address a couple of specific issues which this 105th 
Congress has failed to address as well, not just the budget but other 
issues equally important.
  Earlier this afternoon, Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts spoke to 
education issues, as did Senator Gramm of Texas, and, to no one's 
surprise, there is a big difference of opinion about what we should do, 
if anything, about education. I, frankly, think that we have a 
responsibility at the Federal level. Certainly, the vast resources 
invested in education come from State and local sources, but we invest 
some 6 to 7 percent at the Federal level for programs like title I. If 
your child is falling behind in the classroom, specialized tutoring is 
available through that Federal program and programs that are designed 
for disabled children. If you have a child who has a learning 
disability, a physical disability, some mental handicap, they may have 
a chance to come to a regular school and a classroom because of the 
Federal program. Vocational education, a critically important element, 
is one that I think we all understand is important for a lot of 
students who will never need to get a college degree but need a good 
job.
  Federal expenditures--college loans, I wouldn't be standing here 
today without one. Frankly, I think that it is a good investment for 
all Americans. Yet, there are those who question whether or not there 
should even be a Department of Education.
  In the senate debate in Illinois, the Republican candidate has said 
that he can't find the word ``education'' in the Constitution. He uses 
that for an argument that perhaps the Federal Government shouldn't be 
involved in it. I see it differently. I think the preamble to the 
Constitution about promoting the general welfare of America necessarily 
includes looking at education.
  Think about the turn of the last century, from the 19th century to 
the 20th. And think about this for a moment. Between 1890 and 1910, in 
that 20-year period of time, on average in America we built one new 
high school every day for 20 years. What was going on? Was it a 
building by a Federal program? No. But it was a decision by States and 
localities that they were going to democratize education. So at the 
turn of the century, 10 percent of kids graduated from high school. By 
the 1930s, it was 30 percent. And now it is up over 90 percent. We have 
democratized education. What do we have to show for it?
  Think about the comments of the Senator from North Dakota. Think 
about the dramatic progress we have made. Think about Orville and 
Wilbur Wright, and Neil Armstrong, to the return of John Glenn from 
space. Incidentally, this is his desk right here--a man who serves in 
the Senate now, and on October 29 he will be launched into space again. 
We are all so excited about that prospect. But the fact that there is a 
space program and that we have come so far has a lot to do with 
education.
  What will we do in the next century in terms of our investment in 
education? Will we step back and hope things will work out for the 
best, or will we show initiative?
  President Clinton in his State of the Union Address in January of 
this year suggested an initiative that I think is a sensible one--
100,000 new teachers. Can it make a difference? You bet it can. And 
100,000 new cops across America has made a difference in communities 
from Cairo to Chicago in my home State of Illinois. And 100,000 new 
teachers would mean reducing class size until we can say that in K 
through 3, your child in the classroom will have no more than 17 
classmates in the room. Ask any schoolteacher what the difference is 
between having 18 first graders and 30 first graders. It is dramatic.
  A teacher spoke the other day here in the Capitol and said, ``There 
are days in my classroom of 30 kids when I don't get a chance to speak 
to each individual child in the course of the day.'' She says, ``I go 
home at night saddened because I have never really believed that you 
can educate a child unless you can connect personally.''
  President Clinton says 100,000 new teachers. The Republicans in the 
Senate and the House have not honored that. Now it is a subject of 
debate.
  The President suggested in his State of the Union Address reducing 
class sizes for the lower grades. I honestly believe that if we want to 
graduate quality high school graduates, quality college graduates, you 
have to start at the beginning--childhood development, K through 3, the 
basics, reading and writing and spelling so that kids get a good start.
  That is the President's program. That is one of the things we are 
debating. It is one of the things that has been seriously overlooked by 
this Congress. In fact, the Republicans in Congress have cut the title 
I program, specialized tutoring, for kids who might fall back a grade. 
They have cut teacher training at a time when our teachers should, 
frankly, be getting more skills instead of fewer. They have cut the 
summer jobs program for kids.

  I can tell you a lot of kids don't have a chance to work during the 
summer. They not only don't make a few bucks and don't have a work 
experience, but they are tempted to do the wrong thing instead of the 
right thing. And they have cut technology grants to students and 
schools that need them so they can bring in the right technology. That 
is one of the things this 105th Congress has failed to do.
  They talk about crumbling schools. One of the earlier speakers said 
it is really not a problem that we ought to worry about.
  Take a look at this chart. K through 12 enrollment is at an all-time 
high, and is continuing to rise over the next 10 years. Where are these 
kids going to go to school? Where are their classrooms? Unfortunately, 
a lot of the classrooms that currently exist are deficient.
  This year K through 12 enrollment reached an all-time high, and 
continues to rise for the next 7 years. We need 6,000 new public 
schools by 2006 just to maintain the current class size. Due to 
overcrowding in schools, they are using trailers for classrooms, 
undermining discipline and increasing student morale.
  What about those existing classrooms and these crumbling schools? On

[[Page S12371]]

this particular issue, I salute my colleague, Senator Carol Moseley-
Braun of Illinois, who has really taken the national initiative on 
this.
  Look at the state of current schools in America. Fourteen million 
children learn in substandard schools. Seven million children attend 
schools with asbestos, lead paint and radon in the ceilings or the 
walls. Twelve million children go to school under leaky roofs. One-
third attend classrooms without enough panel outlets and electric 
wiring for computers. If we do nothing about this, the burden will 
shift considerably to the property taxpayers across America.
  But if we have a Federal initiative, as the President suggested, to 
build and repair 5,000 schools, it is going to help the kids prepare 
for our clear needs with more enrollment and to reduce the burden on 
local property taxpayers.
  Let me mention a few other issues that have failed in this Congress. 
One of the current questions that is asked of most pollsters in almost 
every poll is, Does this candidate really care about you? It is an 
open-ended question. It is an invitation for the person who is being 
asked the question to really say, ``Well, I don't know if Senator so-
and-so really cares about me. I would say no.'' Or yes, whatever it 
might be. I think the appropriate question for the 105th Congress is, 
Did the 105th Congress really care about you as Americans and American 
families? When it came to education, the cutbacks that I have talked 
about clearly are not responsive to the needs of many families trying 
to raise their children.
  In the area of managed care reform, so that we would change health 
insurance to give doctors more say in treating us and our children, and 
those we love, so that hospitals would be able to make the right 
decisions for us medically rather than an insurance company, this 
Congress, this 105th Congress with the Republican leadership, failed to 
pass a Patients' Bill of Rights and managed care reform. For those 
families worried about quality health care, I am not certain that we 
have demonstrated that this Congress and this leadership in Congress 
cares about us.
  An issue near and dear to me is the question of tobacco. I started 
this fight about 12 years ago when I banned smoking on airplanes, 
joining Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey in that effort. We had a chance 
this year, a historic opportunity because of the initiative of State 
attorneys general, to bring the tobacco companies and have them face 
their responsibility to the American people. We failed. We failed 
because 14 Republican Senators voted in an effort to stop us from 
having that happen.
  That is a sad commentary, because while we languish in this body and 
cannot face our responsibilities to these tobacco companies, they 
continue to market and sell their products to our children. I have 
never in my life met a parent who has said to me, ``I have great news. 
My daughter came home last night and she started smoking.'' I have 
never met that parent. Maybe some day I will. Maybe some of the 
Senators in this body have met those parents. I have not.
  As we have been unable to address this issue about tobacco companies, 
the number of American kids taking up smoking has risen 73 percent in 
the last 8 years. More than 1.2 million start smoking every day--kids 
under the age of 18--and are likely to be addicted, and one-third of 
them are likely to die because they did it. The rate of smoking--
becoming smokers--is increasing. And this Senate turned its back and 
refused to take action to hold the tobacco companies accountable in 
their merchandising, their retailing and sales to kids--another failure 
of the 105th Congress.
  Another one clearly is in the area of campaign finance reform. I 
mentioned managed care reform. Some insurance companies that don't 
provide good care didn't want to see managed care reform; they 
succeeded in the Senate. Certainly the tobacco companies didn't want to 
see us change the way that they sell their product, and they succeeded. 
Now take a look at the contributions in this campaign, find out which 
candidates receive the most money from just those two groups, for 
example, and you will find the same Senators who voted to kill the 
tobacco bill, voted to kill the Patients' Bill of Rights, will be the 
ones receiving the money.
  We have tried on a bipartisan basis to pass campaign finance reform. 
This 105th Congress has failed. Nothing on education, nothing on 
managed care reform, nothing on tobacco reform, nothing on campaign 
finance reform, and no budget resolution, no effort to preserve Social 
Security or Medicare over the long term, no expenditures on behalf of 
the things that are critical for us.
  This Congress has stepped away from its responsibilities. Some have 
called it the worst Congress that has ever served in this building. I 
am not certain I would go that far, although I searched Senator Byrd's 
history of the Senate to find a more ineffectual Senate, and I can't 
find one. But I will keep looking.
  Another area where this Congress failed is when it comes to sensible 
gun control. Let's face it; the gun lobby holds sway in the Senate. 
Take a look at the rollcalls. Efforts that we have had by Senators 
Boxer and Kohl to require people to keep a trigger lock on their guns 
so that they are safely stored away from children failed on this floor. 
A bill which I introduced which held the owners of guns responsible to 
safely store their guns away from children was defeated.
  I am not arguing about your right to own a gun here, but I say if you 
own one, for goodness sakes, store it safely away from the child. The 
kids who are showing up in these schools and opening fire on their 
classmates and teachers are kids who have brought guns from home, guns 
that didn't have a trigger lock, guns that weren't locked away, guns 
that became instruments of death in the hand of a child. When a 4-year 
old can reach into a grandmother's purse, pull out a loaded handgun and 
shoot another 4-year-old, as happened last year in America, it raises a 
serious question about whether that gun owner has accepted her 
responsibility to store that gun safely.
  That radical notion of holding gun owners responsible for storing 
their guns safely is the law in 15 States and was defeated soundly in 
this Chamber because the gun lobby didn't want it. And the Brady law, 
which has stopped literally hundreds of thousands of convicted felons, 
people with a history of serious mental illness and the like, from 
buying guns expired, and as it expires the waiting period of 3 to 5 
days to check on the background is going to go away in many States.
  This Senate and this House of Representatives failed to respond. Does 
this Senate, does this House care about families across America? When 
you look at the litany here, frankly, there is not much to point to.
  Some have suggested it is not an ineffectual Senate or Congress; it 
is a retrograde Congress--one that is moving back, and I think that is 
true. We have now reached that pinnacle where we are moving toward a 
real balanced budget, and having reached that pinnacle many in 
leadership on the Republican side can't think of a reason why they are 
here. And failing that, they have failed the American people time and 
again on education, on health care and protecting our children.
  I hope that in the closing hours, in some room here in the Capitol 
where the negotiators are sitting together trying to work out their 
differences, they will at least listen carefully to the administration 
and to the Democratic side. We do need to do something about education 
before we leave, something about 100,000 teachers across America and 
smaller classroom sizes. I hope we will have more money for title I, 
more money for summer jobs, more money for teachers and technology 
grants.
  It is not likely we are going to have a Patients' Bill of Rights. It 
is not likely we are going to have a tobacco bill. We are certainly not 
going to have campaign finance reform. But in 3 weeks the voters of 
this country get a chance to go to the polls. They get to look forward 
and decide what their vision of the 106th Congress will be--more of the 
same or new and different leadership.
  I hope that they agree, as I do, there is an important national 
agenda, an agenda which should be served whether the leadership is 
Democrat or Republican. This 105th Congress will put its tail between 
its legs and go whimpering out of town, back to their States,

[[Page S12372]]

back to their districts to carry on the campaigns, but we squandered an 
opportunity here, an opportunity to lead, an opportunity to show that 
we truly care about families across America.
  I yield the floor.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
  Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for 30 
seconds?
  Mr. ASHCROFT. Without losing the floor, I would be happy to yield to 
the majority whip.

                          ____________________