[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 19]
[Senate]
[Pages 27569-27571]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



             AFRICAN GROWTH AND OPPORTUNITY ACT--Continued

  Mr. LOTT. I call for regular order with regard to the trade bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the pending business.
  The legislative assistant read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 434) to authorize a new trade and investment 
     policy for sub-Sahara Africa.

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, having witnessed the vote earlier today, I 
am very concerned about our ability to complete action on the African 
and Caribbean Basin Initiative free trade legislation. This is 
important legislation. I believe it is good for the United States. It 
will be good for Central America, the Caribbean, and Africa. This bill 
is supported by Senators on both sides of the aisle and by the 
President.
  I understand that maybe some Senator or Senators have gotten the 
idea, since we did not get cloture today, that was the end of it and 
this bill would just be set aside permanently. We are still very 
hopeful we can find a way to get this job done. We have a problem in 
that it takes a lot of time to get through the cloture motions and 
complete it, but I have not given up yet.
  I am going to file cloture on the pending substitute, and if cloture 
is not invoked on Tuesday, we will have to move on to other issues. I 
emphasize I am filing two cloture motions, so we can hopefully get 
cloture on the substitute and on the bill itself and allow us to get to 
the substance, have amendments that are important, and bring it to a 
conclusion.
  As a part of all this, I emphasize that Senator Daschle and I are 
working on an apparently unrelated issue but one that is related in 
fact, and that is an agreement as to how we can handle the bankruptcy 
bill and allow amendments, amendments that relate to bankruptcy, the 
credit cards issue, but also would have a number of agreed-to, 
nonrelevant amendments that would be in order.
  I hope we can get that worked out. We are getting very close. That 
would relieve some of the pressure in opposition, and if we can get 
both bills done, it will be a monumental achievement, if we can go out 
this session having done the free trade bill for the Caribbean Basin 
Initiative and Africa and a bankruptcy bill that allows votes on which 
the Senate has indicated it wants to vote.


                             Cloture Motion

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the pending 
substitute 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 assistant 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 substitute 
     amendment to Calendar No. 215, H.R. 434, an act to authorize 
     a new trade and investment policy for sub-Sahara Africa:
         Trent Lott, Bill Roth, Mike DeWine, Rod Grams, Mitch 
           McConnell, Judd Gregg, Larry E. Craig, Chuck Hagel, 
           Chuck Grassley, Pete Domenici, Don Nickles, Connie 
           Mack, Paul Coverdell, Phil Gramm, R.F. Bennett, and 
           Richard G. Lugar.


                             cloture motion

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send a second 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 assistant 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 Calendar No. 
     215, H.R. 434, an act to authorize a new trade and investment 
     policy for sub-Sahara Africa:
         Trent Lott, Bill Roth, Mike DeWine, Rod Grams, Mitch 
           McConnell, Judd Gregg, Larry E. Craig, Chuck Hagel, 
           Chuck Grassley, Pete Domenici, Don Nickles, Connie 
           Mack, Paul Coverdell, Phil Gramm, R.F. Bennett, and 
           Richard G. Lugar.

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, these cloture votes will occur on Tuesday, 
November 2. I will notify Members of the exact time after I have had an 
opportunity to consult with the Democratic leader about the appropriate 
time for that.
  In the meantime, I ask unanimous consent that both quorums which are 
mandatory under rule XXII be waived and the previously scheduled vote 
regarding the D.C./Labor-HHS legislation occur notwithstanding rule 
XXII.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, if I may 
ask the majority leader, he is announcing there will not be any votes 
on Monday; is that correct?
  Mr. LOTT. If we get these agreements worked out and in order to 
accommodate the time that has been requested for the D.C./Labor-HHS 
appropriations bill, then there will not be any recorded votes on 
Monday. The next recorded vote will be, I presume, at 10 o'clock on 
Tuesday, which is the D.C./Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill, and 
then hopefully sometime in short order after that, we go to votes on 
the two cloture motions.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, if I may further reserve the right to 
object--and I will not object, obviously--I wonder if the majority 
leader is able to tell me something at this time? I have given him a 
proposal on bankruptcy--we have cleared it on our side--having to do 
with the nonrelevant amendments and then the clarification of relevant 
amendments to the bankruptcy bill. Has the majority leader been able to 
determine whether that is acceptable and whether he has been able to 
clear it on his side?
  Mr. LOTT. I believe it is going to be acceptable. I have not cleared 
it completely on our side. I just had an opportunity to read over it in 
the form on which our staffs worked. I see a couple of little problems 
that are really clerical in terms of how the three amendments would be 
handled. The way I read it, it looks as if there could be as many as 12 
amendments, but really what we are talking about is 3 and 3, side by 
side. Once that is clarified, unless there is something else I see that 
is a problem, I think we can get this done.
  Mr. DASCHLE. So the majority leader is saying there would be three 
Republican nonrelevant amendments.
  Mr. LOTT. Right.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Has the Republican caucus made that decision as to what 
are the relevant amendments?

[[Page 27570]]


  Mr. LOTT. Obviously, I have to know what the three are on the other 
side. I know one would have to do with education, one of them would be 
the counterpart to minimum wage, and I am not now sure of the third 
one. Obviously, before we do get a final agreement on this, we will get 
that information to you. If there is a problem, obviously, we will have 
to work through that. I do not think it will be a problem. We will 
definitely get that to you; hopefully this afternoon, if the Senator is 
going to be around a little while. We are working on it, and I think we 
are very close.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, assuming we then would be in a position 
to get agreement on moving to bankruptcy, would it be the intention of 
the majority leader to move to bankruptcy on Tuesday?
  Mr. LOTT. It was my thinking that--I believe the way this is set up--
we would complete trade and then we would go to bankruptcy when we 
complete the trade bill.
  We are also hoping we can get some way to consider the nuclear waste 
bill, but it is my plan and my hope--we will have to get agreement, 
obviously, to do all these--to complete the trade bill and do 
bankruptcy and try to do the nuclear waste bill before we go out. 
Obviously, we have some hoops through which we have to jump in order to 
achieve that.
  It is my thinking at this time we will complete the trade bill if we 
get the cloture. We can enter into a UC on bankruptcy before we do 
that. We will talk to you about that, exactly when we need to do it, 
and we can go to bankruptcy before we go out. My intent would be to go 
to it next, after consultation with both sides.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I appreciate the indulgence of the majority leader and 
his answers to my questions. I have one other question relating to the 
trade bills.
  Obviously, we have attempted to discuss how to proceed for some time. 
I have made an offer to the majority leader that he has been kind 
enough to consider; that is, he and I would table amendments that were 
not relevant to trade but certainly allow for at least a period of time 
so Senators can offer these amendments, with the idea that they will be 
debated and tabled shortly after the time they are offered, I am 
certainly prepared to renew that offer to the majority leader. As he 
knows, he has made the situation, again, one which would require a 
procedural vote on cloture rather than a substantive vote on cloture, 
thereby, again, undermining our ability to finish the bill.
  I wonder if the majority leader has given any more thought to this 
suggestion that he and I table these amendments and then move to final 
passage on trade, as I think we could have done even this week.
  Mr. LOTT. In response to his question, I was in the hopes that if we 
could get agreement on the bankruptcy bill and the unrelated amendments 
that would be made in order under the agreement, that would help 
resolve the problem.
  The difficulty is, in going through this process where we would in 
fact both vote to table, first of all, there is a lot of opportunity 
for mischief in terms of what amendments are offered, objections to 
time agreements, and how long would it take. That is one thing that 
worries me. If we do not get cloture and we go through a series of 
amendments where we have to vote to table them, I worry about the image 
of us voting to table, even if we could explain it procedurally. But if 
you vote to table fast track or vote to table agricultural sanctions or 
you vote to table some of these other things, I would prefer that the 
Senate not be recorded as having defeated or tabling some of these 
issues.
  But the further problem is, if we go through and hold a number of 
these on this bill, how do we get it done in somewhat of a foreseeable 
period of time and then be able to get to bankruptcy? I am also worried 
about what in fact happens if we move to table or try to table or not 
table. I think the Senator has been right in saying that is where 
leadership has to weigh in and we have to make sure we get it done.
  I think one of the issues that would have been the greatest problem 
would have been minimum wage, but I believe we are going to address the 
minimum wage on bankruptcy, therefore relieving the pressure, the need 
to put it on this particular bill.
  So that is what we are up against. I have learned around here you 
never say never. I am just worried about being able to get this job 
done. Also, I have not been able to clear on our side an arrangement 
that would go through a repeated number of votes on trade. We have had 
this discussion privately. I think it is appropriate that we have it 
publicly, too.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, just in further clarification, I am 
wondering--there are really two issues. The majority leader has 
appropriately articulated one of the concerns he has with regard to 
finishing the bill. Cloture will do that, if cloture is invoked.
  I am wondering if the majority leader would entertain tearing the 
tree down to allow Senators to offer amendments during the time the 
legislation is pending, thereby at least giving Senators the right to 
offer amendments, because he would still have the assurance, of course, 
that the bill--if cloture is invoked--would ripen and would ultimately 
terminate debate, but he then would cease to make the issue a 
procedural one. Then it would be one upon substance, which I think 
would be advantageous for both the majority leader and many of us who 
work with the administration to see this legislation pass.
  Mr. LOTT. Are you talking about doing it during the period of time 
when we may be discussing, as on Monday, the Labor-HHS bill? Are you 
talking about postcloture? Also, what do we do in terms of getting time 
agreements if the Senator from South Carolina objects to that? Maybe we 
will just have to--that is a lot of ifs--what if, what if. We will have 
to work through that. It would take a lot of delicacy in trying to get 
it to a conclusion. But that is my concern.
  Are you talking about trying to do it Monday, or are you talking 
about trying to do it during the day Tuesday or Wednesday? And how do 
we, in terms of time--even postcloture, a lot of amendments are in 
order.
  Mr. DASCHLE. The majority leader points out a very important problem. 
If we invoke cloture, there are many important relevant amendments, 
that I think he and I would probably both support, that are not going 
to be in order on this legislation. I do not know how we are going to 
deal with that. I doubt he would be able to get unanimous consent to be 
able to offer it. I know amendments having to do with Africa, in 
particular, are in peril if cloture is invoked. So we have compounded 
the problem both from a relevancy point of view as well as from this 
procedural problem that we are attempting to work through.
  You asked the question, When would this occur? I guess I am thinking, 
under the current circumstances, there would not be any time for it to 
occur because the vote on cloture would occur as early as Tuesday 
because that is when the cloture motion ripens. I would be willing to 
work with the majority leader on an acceptable schedule for such 
amendments and the filing of cloture were he willing to work to 
accommodate at least some amendments and the opportunity to deal with 
this relevancy question that I think, regardless of the circumstances, 
he would deal with.
  Mr. LOTT. An interesting sidelight, if the Senator will yield.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Yes.
  Mr. LOTT. Postcloture, for instance, there might be some amendments 
with regard to African trade. I wonder if there might be some way we 
could get an agreement. I worry about it getting agreed to, because I 
am not sure the Senator from South Carolina would agree to it, where 
some of those amendments, while they are not germane, would not be in 
order postcloture, they certainly relate to what we are trying to do. I 
would certainly like to have some way found for amendments such as 
that, if they exist. I could think of a couple I have heard of that 
ought to be offered.
  I will be glad to work with the Senator to try to find a way to see 
if we

[[Page 27571]]

can at least do that and get it cleared. But we do have a problem with 
objections. We can see if we can get it agreed to, and we can try to 
get it agreed to, if we can get something worked out that we can offer. 
Then if it is objected to, we just have to deal with that.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I know there are other colleagues who are waiting to do 
other business. I think we might talk more privately about this and 
proceed. But I look forward to working with the majority leader to see 
if we can find a way to deal with it.
  Mr. LOTT. Thank you.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. If the leader would yield?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. There was no objection to that last request?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There was no objection to the last request.
  Mr. LOTT. I do have one more request I know the Senator from Alaska 
is interested in. If the Senator would like to make that request----
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Please proceed.

                          ____________________