[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 7 (Monday, January 22, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S81-S82]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           THE SENATE AGENDA

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, Democrats have introduced some of our 
legislation. George W. Bush is now President Bush. His administration 
is coming in. We will have votes on nominees.
  I think the important word here is civility. I also point out--not 
that I am opposed to civility--I think when people in the country--in 
Minnesota, Nebraska, and around the Nation--say they want us to be 
bipartisan, what they are not saying is, we don't want any debate. 
People expect debate on issues and they expect us to have differences 
that make a difference, especially in their lives.
  But I think what people are saying is two things: No. 1, we want to 
have civility, we want to see civility; and the second thing that 
people are saying is we want you to govern at the center. But, 
colleagues, they are not talking about the center that I think pundits 
in D.C. talk about, or too many of us talk about. I think what people 
are talking about is not the usual labels but, rather, we want you, 
Democrats and Republicans, to govern at the center of our lives. That 
is what people are talking about, the center of their lives.

[[Page S82]]

  So if, in fact, we have legislation on the floor and have amendments 
and debate about amendments that deal with making sure people are able 
to have a standard of living where they can support their families and 
give their children the care they need and deserve, we are governing at 
the center of their lives. If we are talking about legislation that 
provides more resources to enable States and school districts to do a 
better job of providing the best education for all the children in this 
country, we are governing at the center of people's lives.
  If we are going to speak, as the President did with considerable 
eloquence, about leaving no child behind, let us make sure this is not 
symbolic politics. This cannot be done on a tin cup budget. If we want 
to leave no child behind, the best thing we can do is make a real 
investment in early childhood development so these children, when they 
come to kindergarten, are ready to learn. They are not already way 
behind.
  If we are going to talk about governing at the center of people's 
lives then we are going to have to talk about the health insecurity 
that so many Americans experience. I am not talking just about elderly 
people who cannot pay prescription drug bills. I am also talking about 
people toward the end of their lives who are worried they are going to 
go to a nursing home and then lose everything before they get any help.
  What about how people can stay at home and live in dignity as long as 
possible? I am talking about, not just the 42, 43, 44 million people 
who have no health insurance at all, but the people who are 
underinsured. I am talking about people who are paying more in copays 
and deductibles than they can afford to pay. I am also speaking about 
the people who right now have plans but plans that do not provide 
anywhere near as good coverage as we have.
  It would seem to me that what is good enough for Senators and 
Representatives should be good enough for the people we represent. If 
we are going to talk about jobs and decent wages, economic development 
and economic growth--which is critically important, whatever ways we 
can contribute to that--and education and affordable child care and 
affordable health care, then we are governing at the center of people's 
lives and I think there can be real bipartisanship.
  But I also want to point out I don't see how we do it with a $1.3 
trillion tax cut over the next 10 years. I don't see how we do it if 
that tax cut is all the way at the level of $1.3 trillion. I certainly 
do not see how we do it if it is too targeted to people at the top of 
the income ladder. I ask my colleagues this question: How can we give 
all the speeches and talk about the children and talk about education 
and talk about health care and talk about veterans and talk about our 
commitment to all these issues and all these people and at the same 
time have no revenue? You cannot do both.
  Let's have some balance here. Let's have some tax cuts that are 
targeted at middle-income working families and let's also not rob 
ourselves of the capacity to make the investments in the very areas we 
say we care so much about.
  I also say to colleagues that I think Speaker Gingrich found this 
out: Don't assume there can be an assault on basic environmental 
protections and protections at the workplace, health and safety 
protections, and that will go without a fight. There will be a real 
fight on those issues. I hope we can find middle ground, but I do not 
believe it is a agenda that speaks to the center of people's lives 
because the vast majority of people in our country believe we are all 
strangers and guests on this land and we should make the environment 
better; we should leave it better.
  I also believe we will have a healthy debate--again with civility--
over the question of whether or not there is such a thing as a workable 
star wars, a workable missile defense which ultimately could cost 
hundreds of billions of dollars. This was, at first glance, a good 
idea, starting in the late 1950s. But every time we look at it and 
realize the ways offensive weaponry overwhelms defensive weaponry, and 
we consider the danger of chemical and biological warfare being brought 
in by suitcases, there is no evidence this is technologically feasible, 
much less the way this puts the arms control regime in jeopardy.
  So I say to my colleagues on the first day: I look forward to the 
debate. I look forward to passionate politics. I look forward to 
politics focused on peoples' lives. I look forward to civil debate, 
civil politics. I think we can have that. But I believe so much has 
changed in the country, so much is at stake, the Senate is 50-50--we 
can agree on some important legislation that will help people. Let's 
move forward. Then when we do not agree, there will be major, major 
debate on the floor of the Senate.

  For my part, I look forward to working with my Republican colleagues 
whenever we can and wherever we can and to be honest. With a twinkle in 
my eye, I just as much look forward to the debate and disagreement. As 
a Senator from Minnesota, I am in profound disagreement with the 
direction on some things I think the President is going to go forward 
with. But that is what the Senate is all about, to have debate, to do 
your best for people, and I look forward to the Senate functioning at 
its very best. I hope we can make amendments on the floor to 
legislation that should not be closed off again. We can start early in 
the morning, work late at night, we can do the work and then I think 
the Senate will be at its best as a institution and give all of us a 
chance to be good Senators.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.
  Mrs. HUTCHINSON. I thank the Chair.
  (The remarks of Mrs. Hutchinson relating to the introduction of S. 11 
and S. 140 are found in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced 
Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Florida). The clerk will call 
the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________