[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 48 (Wednesday, April 7, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3894-S3898]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          JUMPSTART OUR BUSINESS STRENGTH (JOBS) ACT--Resumed


                             Cloture Motion

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. By unanimous consent, pursuant to 
rule XXII, the Chair lays before the Senate the pending cloture motion, 
which the clerk will report.
  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 pending 
     motion to Calendar No. 381, S. 1637.
         Bill Frist, Charles Grassley, Gordon Smith, James Talent, 
           John Ensign, John Cornyn, Wayne Allard, Olympia Snowe, 
           Rick Santorum, Michael B. Enzi, Mike DeWine, Trent 
           Lott, Christopher Bond, Thad Cochran, Kay Bailey 
           Hutchison, Jim Bunning, Mitch McConnell.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. By unanimous consent, the mandatory 
quorum call has been waived.
  The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the 
pending motion to Calendar No. 381, S. 1637, shall be brought to a 
close?
  The yeas and nays are required. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry), 
the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. Lieberman), and the Senator from 
Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Kerry) would vote ``nay.''
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 50, nays 47, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 67 Leg.]

                                YEAS--50

     Alexander
     Allard
     Allen
     Bennett
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Chambliss
     Cochran
     Coleman
     Collins
     Cornyn
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Dole
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham (SC)
     Grassley
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Lott
     Lugar
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith
     Snowe

[[Page S3895]]


     Specter
     Stevens
     Talent
     Thomas
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--47

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Byrd
     Cantwell
     Carper
     Clinton
     Conrad
     Corzine
     Daschle
     Dayton
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham (FL)
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     McCain
     Mikulski
     Nelson (FL)
     Pryor
     Reed
     Reid
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Sununu
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Kerry
     Lieberman
     Murray
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. On this vote the yeas are 49, the 
nays are 48. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not 
having voted in the affirmative, the motion is rejected.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina.


                             change of vote

  Mr. GRAHAM of South Carolina. Madam President, on rollcall vote 67 I 
voted ``nay.'' It was my intention to vote ``yea.'' Therefore, I ask 
unanimous consent I be permitted to change my vote since it will not 
affect the outcome of the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The foregoing tally has been changed to reflect the above order.)
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I wanted to take a couple moments and 
update my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as to where we plan on 
going on a very important bill, the jobs in manufacturing bill that is 
before us.
  The bill itself, first and foremost, is a critically important bill. 
We have used the almost mnemonic JOBS bill, but it really does affect 
workers, manufacturing, employment and, thus, it is critical. From 
talking to the Democratic leadership and our leadership and the 
chairman and ranking member, we all agree we need to do everything 
possible to complete this legislation in a timely way because it is 
important to the American people. We have a bill that passed out of the 
Finance Committee 19 to 2 which, by definition, means it enjoyed broad 
and bipartisan support.
  Now we have had two cloture votes that have failed. Both of those 
cloture votes are signals to stop, to obstruct the bill. Yet in our 
conversations, everybody agrees we need to do everything possible--
today, tonight, tomorrow, and tomorrow night--to complete this bill. 
First and foremost, it is an important bill. From a procedural 
standpoint and from what we do over the next hour or so, we are working 
hard to complete the list of amendments we will be addressing. We will 
hopefully be able to lock in that list at some point in time so we will 
have a pathway for completion of the legislation.
  Thirdly, there is a particular amendment, the Harkin amendment on 
overtime, on which I have been clear. Once we have a plan to address 
all the potential scores of amendments in a reasonable way--hopefully 
staying on amendments that directly impact the content of the bill 
itself, that are germane, although the interpretation of germaneness 
varies on this floor--the overtime amendment will be considered and the 
Harkin amendment will be considered and voted upon. But what we ask is 
for a list of amendments and a glide path to completion of the bill. 
Let people vote up or down, yes or no, for or against the bill so that 
we can bring it to resolution.
  First, this bill is important to workers. It is important to our 
economy. Second, we are completing how we can put together a glide path 
to finish the legislation. Third, there is the overtime vote and a 
companion vote that will be side-by-side votes that will take place on 
the overtime issue. We continue to work hard.
  I withdraw the pending motion to proceed.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The motion is withdrawn.
  The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in 
morning business.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                             EVENTS IN IRAQ

  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, a year ago come Friday, I remember watching 
with some emotion as the television recorded the events in Baghdad, and 
an American soldier crawled up a statue of Saddam Hussein and put a 
chain around its neck and, with the help of American equipment, pulled 
down that statue to the cheers of a throng of Iraqi people who had 
suffered for decades under the tyranny of this vicious man, this mass 
murderer, this fomenter and financier of world terrorism.
  I saw that day people hungry for a chance at freedom, hungry for a 
chance to have a new beginning as a people and as a nation. I remember 
shedding some tears watching that scene. I reflected at the time that I 
was watching a piece of American history not unlike the fall of the 
Berlin Wall, not unlike the surrender of the empire of Japan on the 
battleship Missouri to General MacArthur, a moment in which I was 
seeing the values of American foreign policy displayed before the 
entire Earth.
  As a Member of the Senate and as a student of American foreign policy 
history, I have always taken great pride in the fact that America does 
not seek the treasury or the territory of other neighbors and nations. 
But what we do say to the world is: We hold out and spread the values 
of our Bill of Rights, of our Constitution, of our Declaration of 
Independence. We hold out values such as democracy, human rights, 
freedom and liberty, the freedom of enterprise, the spreading of peace 
and prosperity, of domestic tranquility, of promoting the general 
welfare and providing for the common defense of our people and our 
friends. To me, that is what American foreign policy is about. I 
believe that is what it has always stood for.
  So it is with particular sorrow that I reflect upon some of the 
commentary upon our current action in Iraq. I was a new Member of the 
Senate. I had been here 2 years when President Clinton came to this 
body and asked that we issue a resolution that called for regime change 
in Iraq.
  President Clinton, after the expulsion of U.N. weapons inspectors, 
felt compelled to rain bombs on Baghdad for 4 days and 4 nights in 
order to hit those targets where we believed weapons were held because 
they had been declared, but not disclosed. President Clinton wisely 
warned that, based on the intelligence he and other nations had in 
common, we would fight them now or fight them later.
  President Clinton's warnings took on greater urgency for this Senator 
and for many of my colleagues in the light of 9/11, when still declared 
but undisclosed weapons of mass destruction were in the hands of a 
terrorist nation and a sponsor of terrorism like Saddam Hussein. We 
felt compelled to pursue the policy we all voted upon, to change the 
regime in Iraq for the safety of the American people, for the safety of 
the free world.
  As I recall that resolution, it was darn near unanimous, if not so. 
My pride in that vote is we did it together, Republicans and Democrats. 
Yet it is disappointing to me, as a Republican who stood with President 
Clinton on so much foreign policy during the 1990s, when President 
Bush, after 9/11, asked for support and following through on that 
resolution and 17 U.N. resolutions, this conflict has become 
increasingly politicized.
  I think it is important in my comments and in those of my colleagues 
that we not question the patriotism of any of our colleagues who voted 
otherwise or any of our colleagues who believed this is not the right 
action. But I do think it appropriate to question the wisdom of those 
who would undermine this American initiative at a time when we need 
unity.
  The comparison was made by one of my colleagues this is Vietnam 
again. I think it is important, if we want to make that comparison, we 
point out how many inconsistencies there are to Vietnam. But I think it 
is also well to remember Ho Chi Minh said the Vietnam war would not be 
won by them in the streets of Saigon, but in the streets of San 
Francisco, Chicago, New York, and Washington. The whole point of his 
comment at that time was the way you beat America is not to beat them 
militarily but to beat their will at home. I think that is what is 
being called into question.
  What is our will? What are our purposes? For this Senator, my will is 
we

[[Page S3896]]

must win. My vote has been for this action, both under President 
Clinton and now under President Bush. It is unfortunate that some now 
call for policies which amount to retreat and loss. I cannot think of a 
more devastating result for America's place and purpose in this world 
than for us to fail at this time.
  We must win. We must not have the will of the American people broken 
to the naysayers of today. We have to continue to stand up for the 
values of freedom embodied in our founding documents, the values of 
democracy, the values of human rights, the values of enterprise and 
freedom. Those are the things we hold out to the people of Iraq.
  I was stopped in the hall by a reporter who asked if in fact it was 
true American military forces fired a missile into a mosque in Baghdad. 
I did not know the answer until I inquired. Now it is all on the news 
and, in fact, there was a missile fired in the direction of a mosque. 
The reason it was is because five American soldiers were shot from that 
mosque as they tried to advance through the streets to secure the 
security of that area.
  I say for the record murderers and terrorists must not find sanctuary 
behind the cloak of religion in any place. There should be no sanctuary 
for people such as these. So if the American forces made the decision 
to fire where they were being fired upon, I say: Well done and do it 
again. Let them find no sanctuary anywhere if their purpose is to deny 
the American forces the ability to provide security, if their purpose 
is to undo this Nation's effort in establishing democracy for the 
people of Iraq. They have suffered too long; they have suffered 
torture, maiming, rape rooms, weapons of mass destruction, at the hands 
of a brutal dictator. There are a few--I mean a decided minority--in 
Iraq who will not win from the values we enjoy because they won under 
the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. They must not be allowed to win now.

  I plead with my colleagues, patriots all, be careful in the words we 
use, be wise in what we say, so we do not give aid and comfort to the 
enemies of that country, the fomenters of terrorism; that we do what we 
have set out to do, and that is to remove a regime that was bent on 
tyranny, fomenting terror, and financing it wherever it could; and that 
we follow through with the promises made by this Government and the 
previous one, President Clinton and President Bush, that democracy can 
have a new beginning--in fact, a first chance--on the streets of 
Arabia. This is our purpose, and may we win. We will win sooner if we 
watch our words and we weigh them on the scales of wisdom.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut is 
recognized.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, what is the business before the Senate?
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The pending business is S. 1637, 
the JOBS Act.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may be 
allowed to speak as in morning business.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


    Congratulating the Men's and Women's University of Connecticut 
                            Basketball Teams

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise with a strong note of celebration in 
my voice on behalf of my small State. The presiding officer lives in 
the same region of the country I do, so I suspect there is a sense of 
collective regional pride as well.
  I am sorry my colleague Senator Lieberman isn't here. He will be here 
tomorrow. Today is a religious holiday, so he could not be in the 
Senate today. I am sorry he is not here on one level; but on another 
level, every time one of the University of Connecticut teams wins, he 
does the UCONN cheer on the floor of the Senate, which causes his 
senior colleague a significant degree of embarrassment. He knows this, 
and I think he enjoys doing it when I am here. So, the one piece of 
good news I have is I won't have to listen to that cheer tomorrow 
because I myself will be away tomorrow.
  I want to take a few minutes to recognize and celebrate a remarkable 
historical achievement that occurred both on Monday and Tuesday nights 
of this week. I speak of the men's and women's national collegiate 
basketball championships. Never before in history has a single 
university captured both of those titles in the same year, so my 
colleagues and others, I am sure, will understand the sense of pride we 
all feel in Connecticut for the tremendous historic accomplishments of 
these two wonderful teams--both the men's and women's teams. UCONN's 
achievement is stunning all the more because when you consider the 
previous four times in history a school sent both of its men's and 
women's teams to the Final Four in the same year, those schools failed 
to come away with so much as one national championship, let alone two 
in the same year.
  Let me briefly recognize both of these teams. While it is certainly a 
university-wide celebration over the accomplishments of both, each 
deserves a moment of special recognition for their achievement.
  I will begin with the men's team. Those who follow college basketball 
will recall on the cover of ``Sports Illustrated,'' the University of 
Connecticut men's team was predicted to win the national championship.
  They were the No. 1 ranked team in the country. Shortly thereafter, 
in November, they faced, ironically, a Georgia Tech team which handed 
them a rather significant defeat. Ironic I say because it was Georgia 
Tech that the University of Connecticut faced on Monday night for the 
national championship.
  All told, the UConn Huskies would lose six games all season. For most 
teams, that would be reason to celebrate, having won 33 games and 
losing 6. In the Huskies' case, with each loss, more and more people 
around the country began to doubt whether the University of 
Connecticut's team had what it would take to go on to win a national 
title.
  To make matters worse, throughout the season, the Huskies' 
outstanding center, Emeka Okafor, was troubled with a series of back 
injuries and spasms and was unable to play at his full measure of 
capability. He was certainly the heart and soul of the team. He scored 
points, grabbed rebounds, and blocked shots. He is the leader in the 
country in that last category.
  His accomplishments went far beyond his statistics. His mere presence 
on the floor was fundamentally enough to alter the game. He is that 
much of a leader.
  Even more impressive than Emeka's athletic credentials are his 
academic ones. We fail to promote academic success. Emeka Okafor is not 
only the No. 1 basketball player in the country, but he is also the Big 
East Scholar-Athlete of the Year and the National Academic All-American 
of the year.
  While he was putting up impressive numbers on the basketball court, 
Emeka was an all-star in the classroom as well. He earned his degree in 
finance in 3 years with a GPA in excess of 3.8.
  A lesser team might have given up hope after losing a player of Emeka 
Okafor's ability, but a pivotal series was the Big East Tournament 
where he had to sit out two games. Ben Gordon, a very talented guard 
for the University of Connecticut, took over the leadership role, along 
with Rashad Anderson, Taliek Brown, and others. They went on to win six 
straight games and capture the national title.
  One of the most important games, of course, was the Saturday night 
game in which by a margin of 1 point, UConn defeated the Blue Devils--a 
very heated rivalry going back a number of years--facing a remarkable 
Duke team under the leadership of Mike Krzyzewski. We are all very 
appreciative of his abilities and the teams he put together, but 
beating Duke has a special significance in the UConn-Duke rivalry. We 
are very proud of the men's team. They had a terrific season. They 
certainly deserve some special recognition. Jim Calhoun, who is a good 
personal friend of mine--I am very proud of Jim's accomplishments. My 
only regret is that on Monday he was not selected to be in the Hall of 
Fame. I think he deserved it.
  If it was up to my vote, he would have had it. His accomplishments 
over the years, both at Northeastern and the University of Connecticut, 
more than qualify him for a special place in the Basketball Hall of 
Fame. Being only one of three active coaches at the collegial level to 
have won two national championships, Jim Calhoun deserves a spot in the 
Hall of Fame. I am

[[Page S3897]]

confident he will get one soon. I am sorry it did not occur on the day 
he won another championship, on Monday.
  My congratulations to Jim for a wonderful season, a great leadership 
on that team. His assistant coaches, Tom Moore, George Blaney, and 
Clyde Vaughan--good friends of mine--and the players, Rashad Anderson, 
Hilton Armstrong, Jason Baisch, Josh Boone, Denham Brown, Taliek Brown, 
Justin Evanovich, Ben Gordon, Ed Nelson, I mentioned Emeka Okafor, Ryan 
Swaller, Ryan Thompson, Shamon Tooles, Charlie Villanueva, Marcus 
White, and Marcus Williams, all made significant accomplishments.
  The women's team, of course, was also a great success. This is the 
third consecutive national championship they have won, really a 
remarkable record only having been achieved once before, ironically, by 
the Tennessee team they defeated last evening under the leadership of 
Pat Summitt.

  Over the past decade or so, the UConn women's basketball team has 
become synonymous with excellence across the country. The numbers they 
have piled up are rather staggering: 5 national titles, 8 appearances 
in the Final Four, and a record winning streak of 70 consecutive games. 
Over the same period of time, women's basketball in America has 
experienced an enormous surge in popularity, and the University of 
Connecticut women are a major reason why. They have been an inspiration 
to young girls all across our Nation who dream of being basketball 
stars. Their combination of athletic skills, academic excellence, and 
good sportsmanship have made them role models for young men and young 
women across the country.
  Things did not come easily for this women's team this year. Much like 
the men's team, the women's team had a tough run in the early days. On 
January 3, they lost a heartbreaker to Duke by 1 point. It was their 
first home loss in 4 years. For the second straight year, they were 
eliminated in the Big East Tournament. This year, when the seedings 
were announced for the NCAA Tournament, UConn received the No. 2 seed, 
meaning they were not even favored to make it to the Final Four. But as 
they have done so many times in the past, this wonderful team of 
talented young women exceeded all expectations. They were led, once 
again, by the outstanding All-American senior, Diana Taurasi, the 
National Player of the Year. She is a remarkable athlete, a remarkable 
person, not unlike Emeka Okafor. She is a presence on the floor. Anyone 
who watched the game last evening, a wonderful game between Tennessee 
and the University of Connecticut, could see this remarkable young 
woman and the leadership she brought to her team.
  The team has gone 22-1 in tournament games under Diana Taurasi's 
storied career. She is only the fifth player to win two Naismith Player 
of the Year awards.
  She has scored the second most points of any player in the women's 
NCAA Tournament history. She was also named Outstanding Player of the 
Year in the Final Four.
  It was a great game last evening against Tennessee. It has been a 
wonderful rivalry. Unlike the University of Connecticut and Duke 
rivalry, the University of Connecticut and Tennessee rivalry is a great 
one.
  My friend from Tennessee, the majority leader, I point out very 
graciously, about 8:15 last evening, about 15 minutes prior to the 
UConn-Tennessee game, called and offered a polite wager. I am somewhat 
disturbed by it. I appreciate it. He offered to wager that if UConn won 
the game that he would supply me with as many spareribs as I could eat. 
For a heart surgeon, who happens to be the majority leader, to offer a 
Democratic member of the Chamber a pile of spareribs makes me wonder 
what his ultimate goal may have been in that wager.
  I have won the wager. I offered him a high protein, very low caloric 
Connecticut River shad, of which the Presiding Officer is well aware. 
The Connecticut River provides a border of his State.
  Connecticut River shad is high in protein, low caloric, the kind of 
proposal one would think a heart surgeon would propose. No, he offered 
spareribs--thick, juicy, fat-loaded spareribs--for this senior Senator 
from Connecticut to consume. I will share those with any good 
Republicans I can find in my State as part of those winnings.
  I conclude by congratulating the women's coach Geno Auriemma, who is 
a wonderful friend, as well as Jim Calhoun. He has had a wonderful 
career at the University of Connecticut, and has been a wonderful role 
model for players, coaches, and others. He is very active in our State, 
as is Jim Calhoun. It goes beyond their leadership of the basketball 
programs. He is very active in philanthropic programs throughout our 
State, and is always willing to appear at various events on behalf of 
worthy causes.
  My congratulations to Geno Auriemma for the terrific job he has done, 
his assistant coaches, Chris Dailey, a wonderful assistant coach over 
the years, Tonya Cardoza, and Jamelle Elliott. And the players: I 
mentioned Diana Taurasi, Ashley Valley, Kiana Robinson, Maria Conlon 
from Derby, CT, Stacey Marron, Morgan Valley, Nicole Wolff, Ashley 
Battle, Willnett Crockett, Jessica Moore, Barbara Turner, Liz Sherwood, 
and Ann Strother. Ann played a wonderful game last night, as did Maria 
Conlon, and also the forwards on that team, Barbara Turner and Willnett 
Crockett, were terrific as well.
  Congratulations to these two great teams. I have taken a longer time. 
When you have two national champions at the same university in the same 
year, I hope my colleagues will accept my apologies for taking more 
time than would normally be the case. We have to export our sport 
allegiance. We have no professional teams in my State. As my colleague 
knows, in Connecticut you can almost tell where somebody lives by 
asking them whether they are a Red Sox or a Yankee fan, a Rangers or 
Bruin fan, a Knicks or Celtics fan. Connecticut is equally divided in 
its sports allegiance.
  So all my life I have had to embrace teams outside of my own State. 
This wonderful collegiate athletic performance by the University of 
Connecticut has given us a wonderful sense of pride in our State. In 
the midst of otherwise bad news coming out of other parts of the world, 
I thought I would offer this tidbit of good news from a small corner of 
our country called Connecticut, with great pride for these wonderful 
athletes and their coaches, and fans at the University of Connecticut 
and throughout our State.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Cornyn). The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I congratulate my colleague on the success 
of his two teams, both of which were truly outstanding. I particularly 
commend his women's basketball team because before their showdown with 
Tennessee, they beat an outstanding team from the University of 
Minnesota, which reached the semifinals and the final four for the 
first time in the team's history and was lead by two outstanding 
players, Lindsay Whalen from Minnesota and Janel McCarville from the 
neighboring State of Wisconsin, but we have adopted her as a Minnesotan 
now, and the two of them have achieved the distinction of being Kodak 
all-Americans. They led the team, which gave us enormous pride in 
Minnesota, until they met an outstanding Connecticut team. And they had 
an excellent game on Sunday night, which, unfortunately, from our 
standpoint, went Connecticut's way. But the Senator certainly has two 
teams of which to be very proud.
  I also might note, as the Senator from Connecticut knows because we 
have had the occasion to be at the White House together, President Bush 
has very graciously the last years that I have been there invited the 
winners of the women's and men's basketball championships and the 
winners of the men's and women's hockey national championships to the 
White House for a ceremony.
  I am pleased to say I will be joining the Senator from Connecticut 
again this year because the University of Minnesota women's hockey team 
won the national championship the weekend before and, in fact, the 
University of Minnesota-Duluth men's hockey team is in the chosen four 
which begins this Thursday night. So I am very hopeful we will have 
only Senators from two States attending that ceremony from Connecticut 
in basketball and Minnesota in hockey. But in either

[[Page S3898]]

event, thanks to the outstanding performance of the Minnesota women's 
hockey team, which I must acknowledge as a Yale graduate defeated 
Harvard 6 to 2 in the finals, much to my enormous satisfaction, but 
just had a terrific year, it was rated No. 1 throughout the year and 
prevailed in the national championship. It shows, as the Senator noted, 
women's basketball is the same as women's hockey. Under the auspices of 
title IX and the opportunities now that have been given to women 
athletes starting as young girls, they have equal opportunity to play 
these sports. Their talents and skills are every bit as good as men's, 
and they are phenomenal athletes and delights to watch as they play 
these games with the highest level of proficiency. It is something that 
as Americans we should be proud of, the fact that we have made that 
advance and that girls are no longer relegated to being cheerleaders 
for men's sports or boys' sports, as they were when I was growing up, 
but now have shown themselves to be remarkable athletes in their own 
right far advanced to anything that I could have accomplished as a 
meager athlete back in my day.
  So I will see the Senator at the White House.
  Mr. DODD. If my colleague would yield, and I appreciate the comments 
and give congratulations, the Minnesota women's team is a great team. 
In fact, a mutual friend of ours, a former member of the other body and 
I, Rick Nolan, who my colleague knows very well, talked the other 
night, and after the game he told me that Geno Auriemma, coach of the 
women's team, was quoted extensively in the Minnesota newspapers and 
radio stations on commending the Minnesota team. He said it reminded 
him very much of an earlier UConn women's basketball team when they 
were starting out. I cannot tell the Senator how impressed I was with 
Miss Whalen and Miss McCarville. They are great players. I love their 
tenacity and emotion. Your coaches--you have had three coaches in 3 
years--have had some difficult times to go through. I thought the game 
between Minnesota and Duke was one of the great women's basketball 
teams of all time. I suspect we are going to hear a lot more from 
Minnesota not only in hockey but in basketball as well.

  I am glad my colleague mentioned title IX. I meant to mention it as 
well. Back in January, I invited a former colleague of ours, Birch Bayh 
of Indiana, to come to Connecticut to a women's basketball game. The 
reason I invited our former colleague and the father of our present 
colleague, Evan Bayh, was because in 1972, Birch Bayh was the author of 
title IX. There were a lot of other Members involved; I do not want to 
suggest he was the only one, but he was the principal author of title 
IX. I thought he might like to come and watch what a change he had made 
in America.
  It was not solely because of Birch Bayh, but he certainly deserves to 
be recognized for authoring that bill. To give my colleague some idea, 
about 15 years ago a national championship game for the women's 
basketball game drew maybe 1,500 people. Last night, there were 19,000 
people in New Orleans to watch the game. I suspect millions across the 
country were tuned in to watch Tennessee and the University of 
Connecticut play.
  So we brought Birch Bayh to Connecticut on that day when the 
University of Connecticut was playing Notre Dame. We had about 15,000 
people on hand that afternoon, and at halftime we had some of the 
leaders of the women's teams over the years. We had a group of younger 
women just starting out at center court. Birch Bayh received a standing 
ovation from 15,000 people in Connecticut because he made a difference 
in this sport.
  As my colleague has said, to see fathers and daughters, fathers and 
granddaughters, young boys and sisters coming to watch these young, 
remarkable women athletes, created a change in our country for the 
better. I look forward to the day when we will gather at the White 
House--I am confident President Bush will do this again because of his 
great love of sport--when he invites the men's and women's basketball 
teams from the University of Connecticut. Let me go on record today 
inviting, as well, not only the women's hockey team from Minnesota but 
the men's hockey team from Minnesota.
  I thank my colleague for his nice compliments about Connecticut.
  Mr. DAYTON. I thank my colleague. I think we are in a position where 
we can come to an agreement on that. I am not sure many of our 
colleagues would agree, but the Senator is right. In fact, I read over 
the weekend that the women's semifinal basketball games outdrew the 
men's in the national televised audience. That is not to say anything 
disparaging about the men because they had an outstanding tournament as 
well. It shows the popularity of the sport among all Americans. 
Certainly, the skill level to which it is played is something that 
anybody, even a couch potato like this Senator, can enjoy.
  The Senator is right, also, that the President has been extremely 
gracious in hosting these teams. I think he recognizes how much of a 
thrill it is for the teams that have dedicated themselves all year to 
this level of national proficiency to be able to be recognized by the 
President of the United States; it is a great achievement for all of 
them. I look forward to the President's invitation. He has been very 
gracious in the past, and I look forward to joining my friend, the 
Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. DODD. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________