[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Page 12804]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                 AUTHORIZATION OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 123, submitted 
earlier by Senator Daschle.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A resolution (S. Res. 123) to authorize representation of 
     Members of the Senate in the case of Candis Ray v. John 
     Edwards, et al.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the 
resolution.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, in 1977, Candis Ray, who operated a tour 
business in Washington, brought an action against Senator Proxmire and 
Ellen Proxmire, the Senator's wife. The plaintiff claimed that Senator 
and Mrs. Proxmire had tortiously interfered with her business in order 
to favor Mrs. Proxmire's competing tour business. One of the 
plaintiff's claims was that Senator Proxmire had helped to arrange for 
Senate rooms for his wife's tours. In affirming the district court's 
dismissal of the complaint, the court of appeals observed that, to the 
extent that an issue had been raised about compliance with the Senate's 
rules on use of its facilities, ``[t]he judicial function is not 
implicated at all, for only in the Senate forum can observance of the 
rule be compelled.'' Ray v. Proxmire, 581 F.2d 998, 1002 (D.C. Cir.), 
cert. denied, 439 U.S. 933 (1978).
  In the two decades since that decision, Ms. Ray has launched a 
barrage of civil lawsuits, seeking to obtain damages in connection with 
this matter, against the Senate, individual Senators, and Senate 
employees, federal judges and government attorneys who have been 
involved in her prior lawsuits, and the President. In 1989, Ms. Ray 
sought to hold Senator Heflin, Sanford, Stennis, and Wallop, as well as 
an employee on Senator Sanford's staff and the Senate itself, 
accountable for the Senate's lack of favorable action on her complaints 
and petitions for financial payment. The Senate Legal Counsel obtained 
the dismissal of that action.
  The plaintiff has now filed her fifth lawsuit related to this matter, 
this time against Senator Lott and Senator Edwards, her home-state 
Senator. The lawsuit again seeks to hold the Senators responsible for 
the lack of favorable action on her demands for payment from the 
Senate.
  The resolution would authorize the Senate Legal Counsel to represent 
Senator Lott and Senator Edwards and to move to dismiss the complaint.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed 
to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid 
upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The resolution (S. Res. 123) was agreed to.
  The preamble was agreed to.
  The resolution, with its preamble, reads as follows:

                              S. Res. 123

       Whereas, in the case of Candis O. Ray v. John Edwards, et 
     al., Case No. 99-CV-1104-EGS, pending in the United States 
     District Court for the District of Columbia, the plaintiff 
     has named as defendants Senator Trent Lott and Senator John 
     Edwards;
       Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(1) of the 
     Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 288b(a) 
     and 288c(a)(1), the Senate may direct its counsel to defend 
     Members of the Senate in civil actions relating to their 
     official responsibilities: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the Senate Legal Counsel is directed to 
     represent Senator Lott and Senator Edwards in the case of 
     Candis O. Ray v. John Edwards, et al.

                          ____________________