[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 70 (Friday, May 14, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5333-S5335]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       Y2K ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now 
turn to the consideration of S. 96 regarding the Y2K liability 
legislation.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I object.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I regret the objection has been heard from 
our Democratic friends. This is an important issue all over America. 
The clock is running.

                             Cloture Motion

  I move to proceed to S. 96, and I send a cloture motion to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented under 
rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:


                             Cloture Motion

       We the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     do hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to 
     proceed to Calendar No. 34, S. 96, the Y2K legislation.:
         Trent Lott, John McCain, Jesse Helms, Rod Grams, Connie 
           Mack, John H. Chafee, R. F. Bennett, Larry E. Craig, 
           Craig Thomas, Pete Domenici, Richard G. Lugar, Sam 
           Brownback, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Pat Roberts, Chuck 
           Hagel, and Spencer Abraham.

  Mr. LOTT. For the information of all Senators, this cloture vote will 
occur on Tuesday, May 18.
  I ask consent the vote occur at 9:45 a.m. on Tuesday, and the 
mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor.
  Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Roberts). The distinguished Senator from 
Nevada is recognized.


                           Order Of Procedure

  Mr. REID. Will the Chair explain to the Senator what the 
parliamentary status is in the Senate today?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question before the Senate is a motion to 
proceed to S. 96, the Y2K legislation.
  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that we be allowed to offer 
amendments to S. 254, the bill we have been working on all week.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. An objection is heard.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I really think that is unfortunate. We have 
worked all week trying to resolve this issue. I have worked personally 
with Senator Dorgan trying to whittle down these amendments. I have 
worked many hours these last couple of days.
  We have now on our side and on the majority side worked to bring down 
the amendments to a fairly good number. For the life of me, I cannot 
understand why we cannot proceed working all day today offering 
amendments. We have people who are waiting to offer amendments. I have 
an amendment I will be happy to offer.
  We have Senators who will talk into the night offering amendments. 
There is no effort on behalf of the minority to delay this matter. We 
have worked very hard to even get time limits on our amendments. We can 
complete this legislation very quickly. I have had the opportunity to 
look through some of the amendments the majority has locked in under a 
previous unanimous consent agreement. We can work today, all day 
Monday, and then Tuesday there would not be much left to do.
  It is tremendously unfortunate that we are unable to proceed on this. 
I will tell you why, for a couple of reasons.
  When I came home last night--I worked late on the emergency 
supplemental. I got home around 9:30 or 10 o'clock last night and 
looked through my mail. I was surprised to get a letter from a longtime 
friend.
  As some of my friends know, I was born and raised in Searchlight, NV, 
a very small town. There are not a lot of people from Searchlight. But 
I received a letter from someone who was raised in Searchlight just 
like me, someone older than I am but someone I have known literally all 
my life.
  I can remember when I was a 13-year-old boy. I moved from Searchlight 
to Henderson, NV, where there was a high school and I was living with 
an aunt.
  Early one morning, we were all awakened because one of my uncles from 
Searchlight came to give us the very bad news that his stepdaughter had 
been shot while working at one of the hotels in Las Vegas by this 
crazed man who shot her for no reason. He did not know her. She was 
very, very attractive, and this man who should not have had a pistol 
shot her.
  Much of what is in the letter is personal in nature--and not that 
this isn't personal in nature--but the other relates to my family. But, 
let me read the last paragraph. She closed this letter with:

       Hope you can feel free to support all legislation knocking 
     down the strong gun lobby. I would like to personally shoot 
     the crotch out of Moses, also known as Charlton Heston. I 
     have 46 years of anger built up on this issue.

  She is a paraplegic.

       I know it can be political suicide to go up against them, 
     but they are rotten to the core

[[Page S5334]]

     and selfish in their interests. While I have the best of 
     friends and have managed to live (have not really had a life) 
     I dare them to follow me in my wheelchair tracks.

  She closes by saying:

       Stay well, sweet boy [talking to me].

  This legislation we are attempting to resolve needs to be resolved. 
People may disagree with my friend from Searchlight now living in Las 
Vegas, Jean McColl, who has spent 46 years in a wheelchair as a result 
of being shot by somebody that shouldn't have had a gun. But that is 
what we are debating in this Chamber.
  We should have the opportunity to offer amendments. There is no 
reason in the world that we should not be able to offer the amendments. 
We have 30-plus amendments on this side. By Tuesday I bet we could get 
rid of 25 of them, leaving on Tuesday just a handful of amendments to 
work on.
  I also not only indicate what was written by my friend, Jeannie 
McColl, a beautiful, wonderful woman, who shortly after she was injured 
by this crazed man, was divorced and has raised this little boy by 
herself; in addition to the letter from Jeannie, I received another 
letter from a man who was complaining about something he felt was 
somewhat improper. He lives in Reno.

       Dear Senator Reid:
       I am writing in regards to the enclosed National Rifle 
     Association membership that was mailed to my 13 year-old 
     daughter. I am not a gun advocate and have never voiced an 
     opinion and I certainly believe in our constitution and the 
     right to bear arms but I am rather astonished that the 
     membership application is addressed to my 13 year-old 
     daughter.
       As we strive in our community to ensure that our schools 
     are safe for our children, one of the biggest fears that 
     parents have is a gun at school. We have been able to turn 
     her particular school around from a very violent and non-
     academic oriented institution to one that we are all very 
     proud and where the students are doing extremely well.
       I am absolutely amazed that the National Rifle Association 
     would have the audacity to mail membership applications to 
     children. At some point, I believe this must be part of our 
     government regulations. Will my youngest 11-year-old daughter 
     be contacted next with another outrageous suggestion that is 
     only supporting violence?

  It is signed: ``David L. Brody, Registered Voter''--that is how he 
lists his signature--Reno, NV.
  Mr. President, Jeannie McColl, David Brody--we need to move forward 
with this legislation.
  I see the majority leader. I certainly want to yield the floor to the 
majority leader.
  Mr. Leader, what I have said here is that we have some amendments. We 
have people standing by to offer amendments. We really would like to do 
that. One of the Senators on the majority side objected to the offering 
of amendments.
  I will be very brief. As I said, we want to work our way through 
these, as I indicated before the leader got here. We have 30-plus 
amendments. I think we could get rid of 20 of these amendments by 
Tuesday morning if we had the opportunity to offer these amendments 
today and Monday.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could respond.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. First of all, Senator Hatch and Senator Leahy, the managers 
of the bill, are not on the floor at this time. I assume they are still 
in the area. And I have a call in to Senator Hatch so he will come 
back. And we can discuss how we might proceed and see what amendments 
we are talking about. Because you can certainly understand, it is hard 
to have the debate go forward without the managers knowing what 
amendments we are talking about, and that they are sort of in an order.
  I understand the Kohl amendment, for instance, was next in order, and 
maybe even pretty much has been worked out. But I need to make sure 
that that is the case. And then, secondly, there may still be somebody 
opposed to it and have indicated they want to be able to be heard on 
the other side. So we have to make sure that Senators both for and 
against bills are protected in their desire to speak on an amendment. 
And that is basically it.
  Senator Kohl is here. If there is no particular problem, then maybe 
we could go to that one and have him present it and make his statement. 
If there is a Senator opposed to it, he or she could come over. If not, 
we could go on. But there is a need to make sure that everybody knows 
what is happening. And both sides are aware that they should come to 
the floor and express themselves if they desire to.
  The problem is, it is 12:15; it is Friday afternoon. As you know, it 
is very hard to work down this list of amendments when--once Senators 
realize basically the votes are over, they have commitments, and they 
are gone. But I will talk with Senator Hatch as soon as we get in touch 
with him and see if there is any problem with going forward with 
Senator Kohl. Then, of course, we need to go back and see if there is 
another amendment on this side. We will work through that. But we have 
to make sure everybody is notified we are going to be trying to do it.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Democratic leader is 
recognized
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, let me commend the distinguished 
assistant Democratic leader for his efforts, again, and for comments he 
has just made. I am puzzled. I thought we were going to proceed today 
with additional amendments. We have submitted our list with that 
intention. We had indicated we were prepared to work this afternoon; we 
are prepared to work on Monday. But not having our managers here, it 
makes it difficult.
  Senator Leahy is here. And Senator Leahy has indicated a willingness 
to come back and work through these amendments. You know, this points 
up the very problem our colleagues have raised with us when we talk to 
them about having the need to offer amendments on Fridays and Mondays.
  If the Republican manager leaves, it is awfully hard for us to offer 
these amendments. We want to make the most of Friday and Monday. The 
only way we are going to do that is to have the Republican manager here 
so we can accommodate those Senators who want to cooperate. It is hard 
to ask for their cooperation if we do not have somebody on the other 
side to cooperate with.
  So I am troubled by that and I hope we can make the most of this 
afternoon and make the most of Monday. I must say, Mr. President, I am 
also surprised at the motion to file cloture on the motion to proceed. 
That is tantamount to pulling this bill. That is what it means. If we 
get the motion to proceed we are on the Y2K bill. And I thought the 
majority leader said he wanted to finish this bill on Tuesday.
  Mr. LOTT. Would the Senator yield?
  Mr. DASCHLE. I would be happy to yield.
  Mr. LOTT. On that particular point, I do not know what the vote would 
be on the cloture on the motion to proceed on Y2K. I suspect it may 
pass, maybe even pass unanimously. At that point we are on that unless 
we can get an agreement to come back to the juvenile justice bill, 
which I assume we could do, but with the understanding we get something 
worked out as to how we proceed.
  I have been signaling all week that we wanted to go back to Y2K 
especially, and we need to get started early since we had to file a 
cloture motion on even the motion to proceed. But you know, if we can 
get a solid, overwhelming vote on that, rather than spending 30 hours 
on it, hopefully something could be worked out on that as to how we 
would proceed to that, maybe right after the juvenile justice bill, and 
that we could get agreement to come back to juvenile justice at that 
point.
  It is just that I had to get that ball rolling. And I assume and I 
hope maybe that is just one vote in what could be a series of votes. 
But hopefully we will get something worked out on that. But I wanted to 
make sure that--I am certainly amenable to trying to work out an 
agreement to go back to juvenile justice after we have that vote 
Tuesday morning.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I appreciate that clarification and assurance from the 
majority leader. As he knows, of course, that takes unanimous consent. 
There may be people who oppose going back to the juvenile justice bill, 
and so then we are, under regular order, on the Y2K bill. So a vote for 
cloture on the motion to proceed would be a vote to table, to put back 
on the calendar the juvenile justice bill.

[[Page S5335]]

  I have indicated to the majority leader that we would be prepared, 
based upon the negotiations that have been going on all week, to maybe 
work some arrangement out with regard to the Y2K bill. We hadn't had 
any discussion about this. The motion was filed, and so there was no 
communication at all on that matter--this, ironically, at the same time 
we were trying to work with the majority leader to try to accommodate 
his need to move this juvenile justice bill along.
  Surprises are never welcomed, and this was a surprise that was 
disappointing. Nonetheless, we will work through that. We will work to 
accommodate whatever other legislative schedule there may be this next 
week.
  I will say this: At this point I am very concerned about voting on 
the motion to proceed under these circumstances. I think we could 
finish this bill and then perhaps go on to the Y2K bill. I might even 
be prepared to move to the motion to proceed and support it myself if 
we can get this juvenile justice bill done. But to put it back on the 
calendar and then ask unanimous consent to take it back off the 
calendar, if we vote for cloture on the motion to proceed--and that is 
what we would have to do--is a matter that is disturbing.
  We have a circumstance here that is confusing, to say the least. The 
majority leader, for good reason, admonished all of us to make the most 
of Friday, to make the most of Monday, on the juvenile justice bill. 
Then he files cloture, effectively taking the bill off the calendar and 
denying the right to offer amendments and to work through these 
amendments on Friday and Monday. I am hopeful that we can make the 
most. Let us work on these bills today. Let us work on them Monday. Let 
us see if we can't work through the rest of the amendments before we 
divert our attention to other amendments and other bills.
  This isn't a very orderly process we find ourselves in right now, 
unfortunately, because of some of these decisions. I am hopeful that we 
can figure out a way to accommodate the needs of the schedule but also 
accommodate the needs of Senators who are very hopeful to have their 
day in court and their opportunity to offer amendments on the juvenile 
justice bill.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. REID. Before the Senator yields the floor, may I ask a question 
of the leader?
  Mr. DASCHLE. I would be happy to entertain a question from the 
distinguished Democratic assistant leader.
  Mr. REID. The Y2K legislation that has been talked about here today, 
is it not a fact that there has been significant progress made trying 
to arrive at a resolution of that issue?
  Mr. DASCHLE. There has. Many people on both sides of the aisle have 
been involved in very intense and, I would say, productive negotiations 
this week. I am encouraged by the reports I have been receiving 
throughout the week on their discussions. I am hopeful that----
  Mr. LOTT. Are you referring to the Y2K issue?
  Mr. DASCHLE. Yes.
  Mr. LOTT. I wasn't sure what you were talking about.
  Mr. DASCHLE. The Senator is certainly correct.
  Mr. LOTT. I wonder if the Senator would yield. Is there a possibility 
we could work out some agreement where we wouldn't have to have the 
vote on the motion to proceed? It is pretty hard to explain to people, 
when you are facing the threat of a filibuster even to take up a bill. 
So I wonder if we could maybe get some agreement to skip over that and 
then go on, if we had to have a cloture vote on the bill itself. I hope 
you will think about that or talk to the people who are involved to see 
if that would be a possibility. That would perhaps then vitiate the 
necessity of having to get this started next Tuesday in order to get it 
completed within a week's time. If we could get around that vote, that 
would help.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I would be happy to consult with our colleagues and 
report back to the majority leader.
  I yield the floor, Mr. President.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, may I ask the parliamentary situation?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Senator is informed that we 
are on a motion to proceed on S. 96, the Y2K bill.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Kohl 
be permitted to present the Hatch-Kohl trigger lock amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I can't hear.
  Mr. HATCH. I am asking that Senator Kohl be able to present the 
Hatch-Kohl trigger lock amendment, and we will proceed. We will have 
that, followed by the Hatch-Feinstein amendment on gangs.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The distinguished Senator from Wisconsin is recognized.

                          ____________________