[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Pages 805-814]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                           EXECUTIVE SESSION

                                 ______
                                 

 NOMINATION OF GALE ANN NORTON TO BE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR--Resumed

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. President, I come before you today to offer my views 
on the nomination of Ms. Gale Norton to be Secretary of the Department 
of the Interior. I believe in some basic principles relative to 
Presidential nominees for the President's Cabinet. I believe they are 
reviewed for purposes of advise and consent of the Senate with the 
presumption that the President has a right to choose his or her closest 
advisers.
  I believe our duty as Senators in discharging that constitutional 
responsibility of advise and consent is to assure those advisers are 
capable of and committed to doing the jobs for which they have been 
nominated.
  In the past, Ms. Norton has made statements that raise questions in 
my mind, and in many others, about her appropriateness for the position 
of Secretary of the Interior. Ms. Norton's explanations of those 
statements suggested that her views have evolved over time.
  Having listened to her responses and evaluated her truthfulness, I 
take her at her word and trust her sincerity. My own life experience 
tells me that it is possible--in fact, it is highly desirable--for 
individuals to evolve in their thinking over their adult years. If a 
person at 55 has the same views they had at 25, that would raise 
serious questions as to whether this was an individual who was 
sufficiently affected by life to be an appropriate holder of a position 
of major public trust.
  I asked Ms. Norton a series of questions during the course of the 
hearings before the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. I asked Ms. 
Norton if she would support the current moratorium that exists on 
offshore oil and gas leases, particularly those in California and my 
home State of Florida. She answered yes. She echoed President Bush's 
support for those moratoriums. I take Ms. Norton at her word.
  I asked Ms. Norton if she would work with our State and other States 
to assure that the wishes of the State, with regard to existing leases, 
are followed. Ms. Norton answered yes, and I take her at her word.
  I asked Ms. Norton if she would enter into discussions toward the 
objective of developing a plan for the buyback of Outer Continental 
Shelf leases in those States which had expressed opposition to their 
development for oil and gas purposes. This is much in line with the 
plan which is currently in effect in Florida for buyback of leases in 
the area of the Florida Keys that was originally developed by President 
George Bush. Ms. Norton answered yes, and I look forward to the 
opportunity to commence that process.
  I spoke to Ms. Norton in my office regarding the importance of the 
Department of the Interior in the restoration of America's Everglades. 
I consider the passage of that legislation last year to have been one 
of the signal events of that Congress and one of the most important 
environmental advances in recent years.
  As a steward of four national park units and 16 national wildlife 
refuges, the Secretary of the Interior has a distinct role in assuring 
that the natural systems are protected in America's Everglades, 
particularly protected as we move forward with their restoration.
  She clearly understood the importance of the Department of the 
Interior's role in Everglades restoration, and I take her at her word.
  I asked Ms. Norton what her plans were for funding of the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund. Ms. Norton answered that in accordance with 
President Bush's campaign position, she supported full funding of the 
Land and Water Conservation Fund, both those funds that flow to Federal 
agencies and those that go to State and local communities. I take Ms. 
Norton at her word.
  Ms. Norton went further and recognized the important 
interrelationship between a balanced park and recreation policy, with 
the Federal Government having the primary responsibility for the 
protection of natural resources and with State and local governments 
having the responsibility for providing appropriate recreational 
activities for our people.
  I asked Ms. Norton how she would balance the Secretary's 
responsibility to protect public lands with her desire to partner with 
private landholders and local governments in executing those 
responsibilities. Ms. Norton answered that these partnerships are not a 
substitute for enforcement actions, and that as Secretary of the 
Interior, she would remain committed to enforcing the law. And I take 
her at her word.
  I could continue this list of questions and answers for some time. 
However, my conclusion is that Ms. Norton demonstrated during the 
Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearings that she will be open 
minded and will take the expertise of State and local governments on 
the issues that come before her very seriously.
  I was particularly pleased she committed to respecting the moratoria 
on new leases off the coast of Florida and California; that she intends 
to look to the future relative to the buyback of those leases which are 
currently outstanding, and that she intends to uphold the Department of 
the Interior's responsibilities as a caretaker of public lands involved 
in America's Everglades restoration.
  With these assurances, I offer my support for the nomination of Ms. 
Gale Norton to be Secretary of the Interior, and I look forward to 
working with her, the Department of the Interior, and State and local 
officials in my State and elsewhere to build upon the commitments that 
she made during her confirmation hearings.
  I thank the Chair.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the pending 
nomination of Ms. Gale Norton to be Secretary of the U.S. Department of 
the Interior. I suspect that Ms. Norton's nomination will be approved 
by the Senate later today, without my support, and I want to share with 
my colleagues and the people of West Virginia

[[Page 806]]

why I have decided to oppose this nomination.
  First and foremost, I should say that I do not oppose this or any 
other presidential nomination lightly or on personal or ideological 
grounds. President Bush should have a Cabinet of people whom he trusts 
and who will govern as he wishes. In the vast majority of cases, I have 
and will lend my firm support to the President's nominees, after 
considering their qualifications and determining that they will 
effectively represent our nation and share my commitment to tackling 
the challenges facing West Virginia.
  I have no litmus test for nominees, and I do not expect or insist 
that they agree with me on how best to approach our challenges or solve 
our problems. But I do take seriously my duty under the Constitution to 
approve or disapprove presidential nominees. In these times of national 
division and discontent without government on so many issues, what I 
look for in a nominee is an overriding ability to follow through on the 
President's promise to bring our nation together, and a commitment to 
the values that West Virginians hold dear.
  Let there be no doubt that Ms. Norton is a capable and experienced 
person whose willingness to serve her country is to be commended. But I 
do not believe that her life's work reflects the balance and 
inclusiveness we need to chart this new course, and I cannot abide by 
her fight against laws that I and my fellow West Virginians support and 
respect.
  One prominent example is Ms. Norton's prior work to dismantle the 
Surface Mining and Reclamation Control Act, SMRCA.
  SMRCA is a law that strikes a balance between critical economic and 
industrial development and adequate environmental protections. It is 
intended to ensure that after mining is complete, reclamation will 
happen and water quality will be protected. And it provides an 
important level playing field for states and companies that are 
committed to this kind of balance--with federal standards that prevent 
any competitive disadvantage for sound mine reclamation.
  As a constitutional lawyer for the Mountain States Legal Foundation 
in 1980, Ms. Norton tried to convince the courts that SMRCA is 
unconstitutional, on grounds that it usurped state government in a way 
that ``threaten[ed] to destroy the structure of government in America. 
* * *'' First as Governor and then as Senator for a coal state, I have 
disagreed with Ms. Norton's assessment. I testified then in support of 
surface mining legislation that would ``equalize reclamation standards 
among the states and alleviate West Virginia's distinct competitive 
disadvantage in the marketplace.''
  I remain proud of my work on the surface Mining Act and its initial 
implementation during my years as a Governor. I know that the law is 
not perfect, and that we need always to be vigilant about striking the 
intended balance. Yet also believe Ms. Norton's position on this law is 
indicative of her determination to limit or eliminate the federal role 
in this area--even when that role can help balance the needs of 
critical industries with the goal of preserving our environment and 
protecting the quality of our water and air.
  Some will say that Ms. Norton's nomination should be approved because 
she has promised to uphold the law and has recently distanced herself 
from some of her more divisive past positions. I should be clear that I 
do not doubt Ms. Norton would respect the decisions of the courts, nor 
that she would uphold the law as it is written. But I also do not 
believe that one can so easily change course after a career dedicated 
to strong and passionate advocacy for limited environmental 
preservation and protection.
  As Interior Secretary, Ms. Norton would have enormous discretion in 
implementing and enforcing federal law and policies. She would set 
priorities or the Department's resources and would develop and promote 
policy positions large and small. Ms. Norton's career and experience 
reflect neither balance nor moderation, and I simply do not think she 
can be expected to change her approach so dramatically at this point.
  In addition, Ms. Norton's nomination has been questioned by leading 
public health organizations because of her policies and actions 
regarding lead paint and its link to public health, particularly the 
health of our children. I have a long history in promoting children's 
health, and I feel obligated to raise these matters as part of my duty 
to ``advise and consent'' on the president's nominees.
  Let me close by saying that my opposition to Mr. Norton's nomination 
is intended primarily to register my grave concern. I stand ready and 
willing to work with her as the new Interior Secretary and hope we can 
find common ground in striking a balance on environmental policies and 
programs.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I will vote no on the nomination of Gale 
Norton as Interior Secretary because, based on her record, I do not 
have confidence that she will serve as an environmentally-sensitive 
steward of the nation's public lands. There is too much at stake to 
take a chance on someone who, throughout her career, has consistently 
chosen development over environmental protection. Her responses to 
questions at her confirmation hearing failed to relieve my concerns 
about her record of weak environmental enforcement as Colorado attorney 
general.
  For instance, Ms. Norton wrote that ``we might even go so far as to 
recognize a homesteading right to pollute or to make noise in an 
area.'' Although she attempted to explain that statement by stating 
that she was referring to emissions trading, I see no indication in the 
article itself that she was referring to emissions trading. Rather it 
seems to be an extreme position on takings law.
  As attorney general, Ms. Norton pursued government polluters while 
rarely taking on corporate polluters. According to the Denver Post, Ms. 
Norton ``sat out fights when a corporate power plant broke air 
pollution laws 19,000 times, a refinery leaked toxins into a creek and 
a logging mill conducted illegal midnight burns.''
  Further, when I asked Ms. Norton about her position on drilling for 
oil and natural gas in the Great Lakes, she responded that she had no 
position. This caused me concern because her philosophy could play a 
central role in decisionmaking on Great Lakes protections at the 
Department of the Interior.
  We have made substantial progress the past several years in improving 
the quality of the Great Lakes and its habitat. I hope that Ms. Norton 
proves my concerns unfounded and will work hard the next four years to 
protect our valuable natural resources and further the environmental 
progress that we have worked so hard to achieve.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise to speak in opposition to the 
confirmation of Gale Norton as Secretary of the Interior. After 
thorough consideration of her record and her recent testimony before 
the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, I have reluctantly 
concluded that Ms. Norton is not the right person to serve as the chief 
steward of our nation's public lands.
  Ms. Norton stated at her confirmation hearings earlier this month 
that she would feel ``very comfortable'' enforcing federal 
environmental laws as they are written. Unfortunately, her record of 
two decades in private and public life strongly suggests that she will 
do so with little enthusiasm, and, where the law gives her discretion--
which it often does--she will favor resource extraction over resource 
protection.
  Ms. Norton's employment history and legal writings reflect a 
consistent record of supporting industry and developers over wildlife 
and public lands protection, even going so far as to argue to the U.S. 
Supreme Court that the Endangered Species Act and the Surface Mining 
and Reclamation Act--both of which she would administer if confirmed--
are unconstitutional. She has repeatedly taken the position that the 
federal government lacks the constitutional power to address a wide 
range of environmental harms, a view

[[Page 807]]

that is diametrically opposed to a long line of Supreme Court rulings 
and is hard to reconcile with the Secretary of the Interior's role in 
managing our precious natural resources.
  President Bush and Ms. Norton support opening the Arctic National 
Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration. I oppose drilling in the 
ANWR, and I believe a bipartisan majority in the Senate feels the same 
way, but let me emphasize that my opposition to this nomination is not 
about a policy disagreement over ANWR. It is about whether we will have 
an Interior Secretary who will provide aggressive oversight of 
industries that have been granted the privilege to seek profits on 
federal land--whether in the ANWR (should Congress ever approve such 
activity) or in the hundreds of other magnificent places owned by the 
taxpayers of this country.
  The President committed during his campaign to come to Washington to 
unite the nation and to work with Congress to protect America's 
environment. That makes his choice of Ms. Norton to head the Interior 
Department all the more disappointing. With so many outstanding public 
servants across this country to choose from, including both Republicans 
and Democrats with substantial experience managing public lands and a 
balanced view on the best use of those lands, it is regrettable that 
President Bush chose someone who has spent so much of her professional 
life working against the very mission of the Department she would 
oversee and, more importantly, the laws she would enforce.
  I must, therefore, cast my vote against the confirmation of Ms. 
Norton. I urge my colleagues to do the same, and I hope that if she is 
confirmed Ms. Norton will set aside her long-held views and work with 
Congress to protect our public lands for generations to come.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise to oppose the nomination of Gale 
Norton to be the Secretary of the Department of the Interior.
  The Department of the Interior is charged with the protection of more 
than 500 million acres of public land that comprise an important part 
of our natural and cultural heritage. The Secretary of the Interior is 
the steward of this land and is responsible for protecting it for the 
generations that follow.
  Unfortunately, based on her record, I am concerned that Gale Norton 
is the wrong person to handle this critically important responsibility. 
From all indications, she has a strong tendency to favor the interests 
of industry over the needs of the environment. That is not my preferred 
approach, nor does it represent the values of the people in New Jersey 
who I represent.
  When Ms. Norton served as a State Attorney General, for example, she 
was very reluctant to prosecute industries that polluted Colorado's 
rivers and air. Perhaps the most disturbing example of this involved 
the Summitville Consolidated Mining Corporation, which spilled cyanide 
and acidic water into a 17-mile stretch of the Alamosa River, killing 
every living organism that was there. Notwithstanding this egregious 
conduct, Ms. Norton refused to prosecute. It took federal intervention 
to prosecute the polluters. I find this very troublesome.
  In many other ways, Gale Norton has expressed views towards 
environmental protection that strongly conflict with my own. She has 
taken the states' rights argument to the extreme--arguing that the 
Surface Mining Act, an invaluable tool to protect the environment from 
problems associated with coal mining, was unconstitutional. She has 
supported restrictions to the Endangered Species Act that would have 
gutted the law. She has shown a readiness to accept an extremist view 
on what constitutes a taking under the Constitution, something that 
could jeopardize necessary environmental protections. She also has 
strongly supported drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge, something I cannot support.
  Ms. Norton also has argued against the ``polluter pays'' principle 
contained within the Superfund law. That is very troubling to me. 
Coming from a state that has the most Superfund sites in the country, I 
believe strongly that those who pollute the land should pay to restore 
it.
  I recognize that during her confirmation hearings Ms. Norton seemed 
to moderate her approach, and promised to enforce laws such as the 
Endangered Species Act and the Surface Mining Act. Yet one statement 
before a congressional committee does not negate a lifetime opposition. 
For a position as important as this, we need someone whose commitment 
to the environment is clear and long-standing.
  For all these reasons, regretfully, I must oppose the nomination of 
Gale Norton to be the Secretary of the Interior. However, I recognize 
that she probably will win confirmation. I only hope that my concerns 
are proven wrong.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to cast my vote against 
Gale Norton for Secretary of the Interior. I do this with some 
reluctance, as I believe that the Senate owes the President significant 
deference in its review of his Cabinet nominees. The Senate's review, 
however, must be substantive and searching, and cannot amount to 
automatic approval of every nominee.
  Over the years of my service here, I have given great thought to the 
extent of the Senate's advise and consent power. In all cases, I 
believe that our review must focus on a candidate's experience, 
judgment, and ethics. However, I also believe that a Senator may 
consider whether the nominee holds fundamental and potentially 
irreconcilable policy differences with the department she will head 
which put in doubt the nominee's capacity to credibly carry out the 
responsibilities of the department.
  The Interior Secretary plays a critical role in determining our 
national natural resource policy, which will affect our nation for 
centuries to come. I have concluded that Ms. Norton's record reflects a 
philosophy that is so contrary to the mission of the Department of the 
Interior that I have serious doubts about the manner in which she would 
administer the Department.
  The Secretary of the Interior enjoys wide discretion in how to best 
carry out the Department's mission of preserving, ``the Nation's public 
lands and natural resources for use and enjoyment both now and in the 
future.'' I have reviewed Ms. Norton's past writings, speeches and 
professional activities, and they reveal an ideological viewpoint at 
real variance with the legal requirements and responsibilities that she 
would have as Secretary of the Interior.
  Many of my colleagues have stated that they were comforted by Ms. 
Norton's testimony in her confirmation hearing in which she seemed to 
back away from her more controversial positions and they therefore have 
decided to vote in favor of her nomination. I respect their decisions 
but I remain with too many doubts. Therefore, I will reluctantly and 
respectfully vote no.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to oppose the confirmation 
of Gale Norton to be Secretary of the Interior.
  I have three criteria I use to evaluate nominees: (1) competence; (2) 
integrity, and (3) commitment to protecting the mission of the 
department he or she seeks to lead.
  I do not question Ms. Norton's competence or integrity. But I am 
concerned that Ms. Norton's views and her record cast serious doubt on 
whether she is suitable to act as our chief land conservation 
official--safeguarding our Nation's parks, wilderness, and wildlife 
refuge areas.
  The Interior Department's mission is ``to encourage and provide for 
the appropriate management, preservation, and operation of the Nation's 
public lands and natural resources for use and enjoyment both now and 
in the future.'' The Department of the Interior is charged with 
ensuring that we preserve and protect our Nation's extraordinary public 
lands and natural resources. To do this, the Interior Secretary must 
implement critical parts of the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, 
Superfund, Endangered Species Act and other laws that protect our 
nation's natural heritage.
  I am concerned about Ms. Norton's commitment to fulfilling this 
mission.

[[Page 808]]

She has fought against these very laws and regulations her entire 
career. We need an Interior Secretary who can balance economic 
interests with environmental protection. Yet Ms. Norton has shown an 
unfortunate bias toward those who profit from public lands.
  For example, as the Attorney General of Colorado, Ms. Norton refused 
to vigorously enforce environmental compliance against corporate 
polluters. She didn't seek criminal penalties against a mining company 
that allowed cyanide to pollute a river or against a power plant that 
broke air pollution laws thousands of times. She supported a law to 
grant immunity to industrial polluters and weaken the government's 
ability to enforce environmental regulations. She has also sided with 
companies that are being sued for exposing children to lead paint. This 
record of siding with corporate polluters casts doubt on her commitment 
to pursuing polluters and holding them accountable.
  In addition, Ms. Norton has sought to overturn the Endangered Species 
Act. This law is essential to maintaining our nation's fragile, diverse 
ecosystems. Yet Ms. Norton signed onto an amicus brief in a case before 
the Supreme Court in which the state of Arizona sought to weaken the 
Endangered Species Act. She argued that the Endangered Species Act was 
unconstitutional in the requirements it placed on landowners. How can 
she enforce laws that she claims are unconstitutional?
  Finally, Ms. Norton strongly supports opening the Arctic National 
Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling. Drilling at ANWR would threaten this 
fragile and unique ecosystem. It is a short-term solution to the long-
term problem of energy dependency. This policy could result in 
irreparable damage to one of our Nation's natural treasures.
  Mr. President, Ms. Norton's record raises serious concerns about her 
appropriateness to serve as our highest ranking land conservation 
official. Her record indicates that her views are fundamentally 
incompatible with the mission of the Department she seeks to lead. I am 
deeply concerned that her confirmation may lead to a significant 
retreat from the gains made by former Secretary Babbitt.
  Although I hope her actions prove me wrong, I must regretfully oppose 
Gale Norton's confirmation.
  Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise to express my concerns 
regarding the nomination of Gale Norton as President Bush's Secretary 
of the Interior. I will vote against her confirmation today. I will do 
so with some reluctance because I believe that the President enjoys the 
privilege of selecting the people he wishes to join his administration. 
However, after much thought and reflection, I am afraid that the views 
that Gale Norton and I hold on a number of important environmental 
issues are irreconcilable.
  Let me begin by saying that I do not believe Gale Norton is a bad 
person. However, her documented record as Attorney General of Colorado 
and positions she has taken for twenty years in opposition to a number 
of important federal environmental laws, such as the Endangered Species 
Act, the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts, and Superfund are of concern.
  Gale Norton supports, as does President Bush, opening the Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. While the President is 
certainly entitled to nominate those who share his views, I am unable 
to support a nominee who would advocate for the opening of this 
pristine wilderness to oil drilling.
  I am also concerned that Gale Norton will bring what I perceive as a 
solely Western orientation to resource management issues to the 
Interior Department. The Secretary of the Interior must represent all 
regions of our Nation with equal vigor. This means understanding the 
unique issues facing the Northeast. Our open spaces are being churned 
up by development at an alarming rate. New Jersey is losing its open 
space faster than any other State in the Union. Federal funding for the 
acquisition of this open space is not viewed as a ``land grab'' in New 
Jersey, it is a necessity. However, I am not convinced that these 
concerns will be addressed. Open space protection is perhaps the most 
important issue facing a state like New Jersey, and I am concerned that 
the same passivity in enforcing environmental laws and protecting 
natural resources in Colorado will occur in New Jersey.
  Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, ``The throwing out of balance of the 
resources of nature throws out of balance also the lives of men.'' I 
strongly believe that this balance is critical to the success of the 
next Secretary of the Interior. I have attempted to find this balance 
in President Bush's nominee, but have not. I am concerned that her 
record does not reflect this balance that is so necessary. I see no 
real difference between her positions from 20 years ago, 10 years ago, 
and today. Therefore, I reluctantly oppose this nomination, not this 
person.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I join in expressing my concern over the 
nomination of Gale Norton to be Secretary of the Interior.
  The Secretary of the Interior is charged with being the caretaker of 
the Nation's public lands and public's waters, which are held in trust 
by the government for the benefit of the public.
  Our Nation's public lands and public waters contain vast riches of 
minerals, oil, gas, timber, and grazing areas. The Secretary of the 
Interior has the responsibility of ensuring that these private uses of 
the public lands are compatible with the public's right to enjoy these 
lands as a priceless part of the Nation's environmental heritage.
  I am concerned that Gale Norton's record has too often been hostile 
to many of our most fundamental environmental protection laws. The 
views she has often expressed in opposition to needed federal 
environmental regulation raises serious doubts about her commitment to 
the environment. Her partial, vague, and evasive answers to questions 
at the committee hearing were in sharp contrast to her past harsh 
criticisms of the important federal role in the protection of the 
Nation's natural resources.
  The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the National 
Environmental Policy Act--which calls for the government to `` . . . 
fulfill the responsibilities of each generation as trustee of the 
environment for succeeding generations''--are long settled and 
respected bodies of law. The American people are proud of the progress 
that we have made in recent years on the environment. The talented and 
committed officials in the Department of the Interior deserve a great 
deal of credit for that achievement, and they and the American people 
deserve a Secretary of the Interior who shares that commitment.
  Superfund and the Surface Mining Act have also been largely 
successful environmental laws. But it was environmental brinkmanship 
that made those laws necessary.
  Energy crises in the 1970's and again during the Gulf war were not 
solved by putting our priceless environmental heritage at risk, and 
they cannot be solved by such a strategy today.
  The position of Secretary of the Interior requires a vigilant leader 
who can resist the urge to exploit our natural resources at the expense 
of the environment.
  The next Secretary will also face numerous challenges in the 
management and development of our National Parks. As recreation becomes 
more and more popular, our parks and wildlife refuges will continue to 
be under pressure, and sound management policies will be needed to 
protect them.
  These, and many other environmental concerns, are widely shared by 
the vast majority of the American people, and the country needs a 
Secretary of the Interior who shares that commitment.
  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today as the Senate begins the 
consideration of the nomination of Gale Norton to be Secretary of the 
Interior, we confront an enormous responsibility.
  The individual charged with this responsibility will set the 
direction for our national policies for our natural resources. This 
person will have the power to decide whether to nurture and conserve, 
or to develop and destroy our Nation's great resources. As a member of 
this body, I have committed myself

[[Page 809]]

to a career of environmental stewardship. I have tried to cast votes 
and offer legislation that fully reflects the importance and lasting 
legacy of America's natural resource management decisions. I have done 
so because of the role of my own home state in this matter. America's 
conservation history is Wisconsin's conservation history. From John 
Muir's battles with Teddy Roosevelt over the Hetch Hetchy Dam, to 
Sigurd Olson's efforts to create the National Wilderness Preservation 
System, to former Senator Gaylord Nelson's efforts to create the Wild 
and Scenic Rivers System, to Aldo Leopold's struggles to move and mold 
the Forest Service, Wisconsin's role in conservation has been rich. I 
also have another tradition to defend and uphold. I have committed 
myself, to a constructive role in the Senate's duty to provide advice 
and consent with respect to the President's nominees for cabinet 
positions.
  As the Secretary of the Interior, Ms. Norton will be charged with 
unique and historic responsibilities, which will be as important as 
they are far reaching. In varying ways, all Americans will be affected 
by her decisions. As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the 
Department of the Interior has responsibility for most of our 
nationally owned public lands and resources. During the nominations 
process, I have been disturbed to learn of the fears that Ms. Norton 
will not live up to this responsibility for stewardship of all our 
natural resources. I have been concerned that Ms. Norton's background 
might cloud her judgement and objectivity on a number of important 
issues and place her at odds with members of the conservation community 
and with this Senator. While I am concerned with Ms. Norton's professed 
unfamiliarity with many of the laws which I regard as critical for the 
promotion of balanced conservation policy, I am somewhat heartened by 
Ms. Norton's responses to questions by members of the Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee with regard to her responsibility to 
enforce federal environmental law. I am encouraged by this statement 
for two reasons: first, it is an acknowlegement that she is obliged to 
work hard to enforce the letter of the law; second, it is an admission 
that there is indeed an interest on the part of all Americans in 
preserving our environmental heritage.
  I will take Ms. Norton at her word--that she will devote her time and 
energy to the proper enforcement of the Interior Department policies, 
rather than circumvent or repeal laws which preserve our dwindling 
resources, that she will attempt to address the pollution of public 
lands which ruins our enjoyment of them and makes our air unfit to 
breathe and our water unsafe to drink, and that she will protect our 
land and water resources. For this reason, I will vote for her today.
  However, in doing so, I fully recognize that my responsibility 
involves nothing less than overseeing the institution with stewardship 
of our public lands and national resource wealth. The Senate does not, 
by confirming Ms. Norton, place the responsibility for the protection 
of public lands and resources in the hands of a single individual. I do 
not believe that the American people are ready to ignore the voices of 
the environmental community who remind us how fragile and vulnerable 
our resources can be. That is not the message of November 4, 2000. I am 
hopeful that these voices will be heard by Ms. Norton. I am placing my 
trust in her that she will embrace her duty to take into account the 
future and forseeable consequences of her actions, and that she will be 
guided by the knowledge that this Senator will raise those consequences 
at all appropriate opportunities.




  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise in support of the nomination of Gale 
Norton as Secretary of the Interior, and encourage my colleagues in the 
United States Senate to vote to approve her nomination as the first 
woman to ever hold this position as the premier land manager within the 
United States Government.
  I don't know how I can impress upon this Senate the great impact that 
the Secretary of the Interior can have on my home state of Wyoming, and 
on the rest of the Western United States. Between the National Park 
Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Fish and Wildlife Service, the 
Department of the Interior is the single largest land owner within the 
State of Wyoming. This means that most of my state's rich natural 
resources and energy opportunities are dependent on the Interior to be 
able to find and develop those resources. I know from experience that 
with cooperation and open communication this process can be completed 
in a manner that not only benefits our nation's energy and mineral 
needs, but does so in a way that preserves the rich natural beauty and 
wildlife that calls Wyoming home.
  In order to do this, however, both the Federal Government and local 
communities must be able to sit down together and talk through any 
potential conflicts and must do so in a way that lays the groundwork 
for the future. In her years as Attorney General for the State of 
Colorado, Ms. Norton was able to demonstrate the invaluable ability to 
talk to people, on all sides of the issues, to get to the heart of the 
matter, and to effect real change in the only place that really matters 
when it comes to environmental and community protection--directly on 
the ground.
  As a Wyoming State legislator and member of the Wyoming State Senate, 
I watched Ms. Norton as she pioneered the development of Colorado's 
environmental self audit program. I was very interested in seeing what 
obstacles she faced and what hurdles she had to overcome in creating 
this incredible environmental protection opportunity, mainly because I 
wanted the same thing for my state. You see, I knew that if I could 
provide the people of Wyoming the same opportunity that Ms. Norton was 
giving the people of Colorado--the opportunity to find environmental 
hazards for themselves, and to provide a way for them to correct those 
hazards without being penalized for being responsible--then I knew that 
my friends and neighbors would jump at the chance to clean up their 
businesses and neighborhoods, and would make their homes safer, on 
their own, for their children to grow up in.
  I also knew that without this program there would be no incentive for 
private business owners to find out what kind of conditions existed on 
their property. In fact, the overbearing bureaucratic penalties that 
exist to punish conscientious property owners work more as a deterrent 
to responsibility than as a motivation to accomplish the goals of 
environmental clean-up.
  Because of her efforts I am happy to say that she made my work much 
easier, and now both Colorado and Wyoming have responsible, 
environmental audit laws that encourage businesses to clean up their 
property without forcing the United States taxpayers to foot the bill. 
I am also proud to say that these statutes have made more of a 
difference on the health and environmental well-being of local 
communities than superfund. There is more proactive action on the part 
of property owners and there is a greater testing of unknown substances 
so we now have a much better understanding of what is out there in our 
communities. Most states have now followed this lead.
  Ms. Norton is also aware of the fiscal responsibilities that many 
Federal agencies have shirked over the past several years. In one 
discussion I had with Ms. Norton, she made the comment that as a state 
official she had a fixed budget and was responsible for every dollar, 
but in reviewing the budgets of the Federal agencies that fall under 
the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior she was appalled to 
see the lack of accountability. I encouraged her then, and I will 
encourage her now, to do what she can as Secretary to see that this 
situation is reversed. Most policy is set by the President. Secretaries 
administer and manage huge work forces. Ms. Norton is a manager.
  In closing Mr. President, when I spoke with Ms. Norton earlier this 
year I was encouraged by her sincerity and

[[Page 810]]

by her understanding of the responsibility and sense of duty that must 
accompany public servants like the Secretary of the Interior. I am 
convinced that Ms. Norton will uphold the laws of this land and will 
hold not only private individuals responsible for their actions, but 
will ensure that the Federal Government does not shirk its duties as a 
major landowner, or its liabilities as a polluter.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, today I join a majority of my colleagues in 
the Senate to confirm President Bush's nomination of Gale Norton as the 
Secretary of the Interior.
  As you know the Secretary of the Interior has tremendous 
responsibilities as the chief steward of America's public lands as well 
as the biological and mineral resources native to those lands.
  The role of the Secretary of the Interior is nowhere more important 
than in the great state of Nevada where nearly 90 percent of the land 
is owned by the federal government.
  Through her oversight of the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of 
Reclamation, and the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Secretary of the 
Interior impacts the lives of Nevadans every day.
  The challenges of managing the Interior Department have evolved over 
the years. Today, some of the most important issues facing the 
Secretary are urban land management decisions that did not pose major 
problems decades ago.
  For example, the Las Vegas Valley, which is the fastest growing 
region in the country, is completely encircled by federal lands. Much 
of this public land, including scattered parcels throughout the Valley, 
is managed by the Interior Department.
  The tremendous growth in Southern Nevada places increasing pressure 
on our public land resources.
  As an example, recreational sportsmen cannot safely shoot in many 
parts of the Southern Nevada desert any longer because of urban growth 
and competing recreational uses.
  In an effort to remedy this problem, I am working with Clark County 
and the BLM to identify and dedicate public land for use as a 
recreational shooting complex. Recreation and access to public lands 
are of paramount importance in Nevada.
  Conservation and protection of natural resources in the Silver State 
are important too.
  It is my sincere hope that Secretary Norton and President Bush do not 
view confirmation of someone who once worked for the Mountain States 
Legal Foundation as a mandate for the rollback of environmental 
protections enacted over the past 8 years.
  The recently enacted phase out of snowmobile use in Yellowstone 
National Park will provide a litmus test for whether President Bush 
will promote conservation or oversee the decline and degradation of our 
treasured national park system and our public lands generally.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, after carefully considering the record 
and statements of Gale Norton, nominee for Secretary of the Interior, I 
am voting to confirm her nomination today. I have serious concerns 
about many of the land use and conservation policies Ms. Norton has 
promoted in the past, and my vote is in no way a confirmation of these 
policies. However, after a lengthy discussion with Ms. Norton, she has 
pledged to work closely with me on the issues that affect Washington 
state.
  We discussed many of Washington's challenges, including the Hanford 
Ranch, Elwha dams, salmon recovery, habitat conservation plans, and 
funding for Interior programs. In our conversation, I assured Ms. 
Norton that if she threatens Washington's interests she will find in me 
a strong and persistent opponent. I will speak out from the Senate 
floor and use my position on the Appropriations Committee to challenge 
any initiatives or spending proposals that don't meet Washington's 
needs. If the Interior Secretary seeks to roll back important policy 
initiatives, I will defend my state with every authority available to 
me. President Bush wants Gale Norton to manage the Department of the 
Interior. I will hold President Bush accountable for his policies and 
budget decisions.
  I believe it's important to leave the door open for discussion, and I 
trust that Gale Norton will reach out to work with Senator Cantwell and 
me on Northwest issues. Given her pledge to work with me and her 
promises during the confirmation process, I'm voting for Gale Norton 
with the understanding that we will have a seat at the table on the 
policies and budgets that will affect us.
  Washington state has many environmental challenges. We have the 
responsibility for recovering endangered species, including salmon, 
bulltrout, sturgeon, the spotted owl, and the marbled murrelet. The 
Department of the Interior plays a crucial role in protecting these 
species on federal lands. If the department does a good job of 
protecting these species, less of a recovery burden will fall to 
private property owners. In addition, we must also fund land and forest 
conservation efforts.
  The next Interior Secretary will need to develop innovative 
partnerships that include Federal, State, local, and tribal 
governments, along with private property owners and businesses. It is 
particularly important in Washington state that the Interior Secretary 
works closely with tribal governments and treats them as equals. 
Further, I call on Ms. Norton to fill critical posts, including the 
Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, with appointees who are 
familiar with the unique environmental needs of the Pacific Northwest.
  I do want to address President Bush's proposal to open the Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to drilling, a proposal Ms. Norton 
supports. During the past eight years, I've consistently opposed 
drilling in ANWR, which the Bush Administration considers a high 
priority. I remain very skeptical of our ability to drill without 
threatening or disrupting this pristine area, and I will continue to 
share my concerns with the Bush Administration.
  Throughout the past eight years, we have made great progress in 
protecting the environment and preserving natural resources while 
maintaining resource-dependent industries. We need to continue our 
progress in this fragile balance. Now is not the time to undo the 
environmental progress made under previous Administrations. Now is the 
time to look ahead, to work together, and to find creative solutions to 
the many problems still facing our nation. I look forward to working 
together with Ms. Norton in the months ahead.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, today I rise to comment on the 
nomination of Gale Norton to the position of Secretary of the Interior, 
and to explain the reasons why I plan to support her nomination.
  The founders of this nation gave the United States Senate an 
important responsibility when they granted it advice and consent 
authority over Presidential nominations. Throughout my career in the 
Senate I have taken this responsibility seriously and have established 
consistent standards for application of this power, regardless of which 
political party sits in the White House.
  However, not all Presidential nominations are equal. I apply a very 
different standard to Supreme Court and federal judicial appointments 
than to political appointees.
  Federal judges and Supreme Court Justices receive the highest 
standard of scrutiny. They are confirmed for life and can only be 
removed through impeachment by Congress. Justices, by the nature of the 
job, should be non-partisan. I subject Judicial nominees to intense 
review, examining their experience as well as their ideology.
  Cabinet and subcabinet appointments receive a different standard of 
scrutiny. These appointees serve at the will of the President and can 
be removed from office with relative ease. Unless the nominee is shown, 
through the nomination and hearing process, to be unfit or unqualified 
to serve, I believe any President should be allowed to choose his or 
her cabinet and the Senate should confirm the nomination.
  Mr. President, Gale Norton and I may disagree on many issues. 
However, after two days of hearings by the Senate Energy and Natural 
Resources

[[Page 811]]

Committee and answers to over 200 questions submitted in writing, she 
came across as a qualified nominee of integrity and intellect who is 
committed to upholding current environmental laws, whatever her past 
opinions. In fact, I have been encouraged by the fact that her 
nomination was reported to the full Senate by a bipartisan vote of 18-
2.
  My guess is that today she will receive the votes of a majority of 
Democrats who, like me, consider themselves devoted environmentalists. 
My good friend and the ranking member of the Energy Committee, Senator 
Jeff Bingaman, who had earlier expressed concern about the nomination, 
spoke yesterday on the floor of the Senate and said that Norton had 
stated her commitment to ``conserve our `great wild places and 
unspoiled landscapes' '' and to enforce endangered species, surface 
mining and other laws. ``I take her at her word,'' he told the Senate.
  I will also take her at her word, and will be watching her actions 
carefully on the natural resource issues that we Vermonters care so 
deeply about. In this regard, let me take a moment to lay out my 
positions and priorities for protecting the natural resources under the 
purview of the Interior Secretary.
  I will not support drilling for oil or natural gas in the Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). I continue to believe that the United 
States' dependence on oil and its byproducts cannot overshadow the 
importance of keeping ANWR free from the detrimental impacts of oil and 
natural gas drilling and exploration. Drilling and exploration in this 
pristine Arctic wilderness could have a lasting impact that would 
forever damage the environment of this region. Hopefully, we can secure 
permanent protection for this unique linkage of ecosystems upon which 
the local communities depend, and the American community as a whole 
should value as a national and natural treasure.
  In order to reduce our dependence on nonrenewable resources like oil 
and coal, we must consider alternative energy resources, as well as 
increasing investments in energy efficient technologies and promotion 
of energy conservation. I have worked to increase our nation's 
investments in solar, wind and other alternative technologies since 
founding the Congressional Solar Coalition in 1976. We must make 
investing in alternative energy sources and energy efficiency a higher 
priority.
  In the past and in the future, many environmental battles come down 
to funding questions. One of the new Secretary's first responsibilities 
will be to help draft a Bush Administration budget. She should know 
already that I am a strong supporter of full funding for the Land and 
Water Conservation Fund, and I will fight to achieve this goal in the 
next Congress.
  Our National Parks and National Monuments must receive adequate funds 
to cope with greater use by the American public and to ensure that 
these treasures and the animals that inhabit them are not loved to 
death. The Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of Land Management 
are not agencies we often hear about in the news, but they play a 
critical role in preserving our native species of plants and animals 
and they must be adequately funded.
  Finally, I have been and continue to be a strong supporter of mining 
and grazing reform. It is outrageous that a 19th century statute 
continues to govern what the U.S. taxpayer is paid by companies 
extracting precious resources from public lands.
  As a Senator from the party of President Theodore Roosevelt, and a 
Senator who represents the beautiful State of Vermont, I believe 
strongly that we all must be conservationists. I will vote for Gale 
Norton today because I am confident that she will stand by her promise 
to enforce the laws that are the responsibility of the Interior 
Secretary, and will consult with all interested parties in making 
regulatory decisions. Furthermore, I pledge to be a watchdog to ensure 
that environmental protection and conservation are not undermined at 
the Department of the Interior.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to explain why I have decided 
to support Gale Norton as the Secretary of the Interior. It is not 
because I agree with her on every issue. In fact, on many issues we 
disagree. She supports expanding the extraction of resources on federal 
lands, including allowing drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge. I do not. In the past, she has supported greater exploitation 
and commercialization of our public lands, and that troubles me. While 
I agree that public lands can have mixed uses, I am concerned that Ms. 
Norton will swing the pendulum too far in favor of industry. Her 
attitudes, however, fairly represent those of the President, and 
President Bush has the right to appoint a Cabinet that is a reflection 
of his beliefs.
  While I am concerned about her past writings and beliefs about the 
role of the Federal government in managing federal lands and conserving 
natural resources, she has pledged to the Senate to uphold the law as 
it is currently formulated by the Congress and interpreted by the 
courts. She has told the Senate that her thinking on issues like global 
warming has changed. She now says that she supports the Endangered 
Species Act, and the right of the Federal government to intervene on 
private lands to protect wildlife from extinction. I will take her at 
her word and give her the opportunity to serve as our nation's leading 
conservationist.
  Ms. Norton's opponents have compared her to James Watt, for whom she 
once worked, but I hope she learned well from his term as the Secretary 
of the Interior. I hope she learned the lesson that the American people 
will not tolerate an extremist anti-environment agenda. Americans have 
embraced a moderate environmental agenda that protects, nurtures, and 
manages our lands in the public interest, and not for the private 
benefit of a few. This country will not allow an Administration to 
abuse that public trust.
  Secretary Watt damaged not only the Department of the Interior and 
our public lands, but the Administration that he served. President Bush 
has spoken at length about bi-partisanship and bringing this country 
together. Nothing will evaporate the spirit of bi-partisanship faster 
than vigorously pursuing an anti-environmental agenda.
  So I believe that Ms. Norton should be given the opportunity to serve 
as Secretary of the Interior, but she will be watched carefully by 
Congress and private organizations. She needs to prove to many that she 
will be a faithful steward of our natural riches and properly balance 
development with conservation.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I would like to take just a moment to give 
my full and heartfelt support to Ms. Gale Norton as our new Secretary 
of the Interior. It gives me great pleasure and some hope that our 
national land management policies will be more balanced and will take 
local views into account that she has been confirmed today.
  I congratulate President George W. Bush for putting forward this 
outstanding nominee. Clearly, one of the first impressions our new 
president has made on the nation is that he is willing to seek out and 
surround himself with the most capable administrators our nation has to 
offer. If anyone wishes to know why Gale Norton is such a great 
nominee, just look at what her worst critics are not saying about her. 
No one has questioned her intelligence; no one has questioned her 
qualifications; and no one has questioned her ability to work with all 
sides on an issue. Some may question her views on the issues, but that 
is to be expected in a change of government.
  Mr. President, Gale Norton understands what Utahns have always known, 
but what the last administration was unwilling to acknowledge: that the 
environment and our public lands belong to the people, not to federal 
bureaucrats. Gale Norton seems to believe, like I do, that some power 
should be returned to our state and local communities who have the 
greatest interest and the greatest stake in protecting their 
environment.
  There will always be a role for our federal government in protecting 
our environment and our federal lands. But our federal government 
cannot be effective when it fails to listen to the needs of the people 
it is supposed to

[[Page 812]]

serve. After the last eight years of increasing all viewpoints will be 
a breath of fresh air. I urge all of my colleagues, today, to join me 
in confirming Gale Norton as the Secretary of the Interior.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the 
confirmation of Gale Norton as Secretary of the Interior. I do not 
reach this decision easily. However, I do not have the confidence that 
Ms. Norton will bring the necessary balanced approach that should be 
required for this position.
  I have discussed the important and special role that the Secretary of 
the Interior performs in this country when the Senate has considered 
other nominees to this office. In 1983, I described the office of the 
Secretary of the Interior as:

       The chief environmental officer of the United States as 
     well as the conservator, trustee and steward of the public 
     lands and natural resources. At the same time, the Secretary 
     is expected to promote and direct the reasonable and 
     efficient use of those lands and natural resources, in ways 
     which do not conflict with his primary environmental 
     responsibilities. And the American people, those who wish to 
     preserve those lands and resources as well as those who wish 
     to develop them, expect that the Secretary will bring to bear 
     an appropriate expertise, experience and balanced temperament 
     on the wide variety of issues he is called upon to decide.

  I do not question that Gale Norton has a great deal of experience and 
knowledge about the matters that will come before her. However, I am 
concerned that her record fails to indicate a ``balanced temperament on 
the wide variety of issues she will be called upon to decide.''
  From her earlier attacks on the Surface Mining Act and Endangered 
Species Act to positions she has taken to undermine implementation of 
the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, her judgments evidence a pattern 
that calls into question exactly how she will view her responsibilities 
as the steward of our public lands when she is called upon to make 
decisions about their appropriate use. The position of Secretary of the 
Interior is too important to entrust to someone whose record does not 
convey a commitment to the preservation of our public lands and natural 
resources.
  For these reasons, I will cast my vote against the confirmation of 
Ms. Norton.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I rise today to express my opposition to 
the nomination of Gale Norton to be Secretary of the Interior. While I 
am not a member of the Energy Committee that held hearings on the 
nomination, I have closely reviewed her record and her testimony.
  The Secretary of the Interior is the steward of our country's natural 
resources and public lands. Any nominee for this position should be 
selected for their commitment to protecting our precious resources as 
well as their dedication to uphold and enforce our environmental laws.
  After reviewing the record of Gale Norton there is little doubt that 
she is an intelligent and dedicated public servant who has strong 
convictions about issues that concern the Department of the Interior. 
On the one hand, I commend her commitment to her strong ideological 
views. However, it is this unyielding commitment to those strongly held 
beliefs that makes me question whether she will be able to set those 
views aside and consider the views of all Americans as we debate 
important issues concerning the natural resources.
  As our country continues to prosper, the Secretary of the Interior 
will oversee a number of ongoing debates concerning public lands and 
the protection of endangered species. There is no single solution that 
can serve as an answer to land management issues in each region of our 
country. There are many stakeholders with a wide variety of views on 
how we protect, access and use our natural resources. We in Vermont and 
New England are deeply concerned about pressure being placed on our 
natural resources from rapid growth. We Vermonters also have concerns 
that environmental standards should be strictly enforced for our lands, 
air, water and threatened species.
  The record of Gale Norton provides important insight on how she will 
interpret laws and weigh the views of stakeholders concerning our 
natural resources. These beliefs have been remarkably unwavering.
  Based on the record I must vote against this nomination. However, if 
Gale Norton is confirmed, you can be sure that I will work closely with 
her on a variety of issues that are important to Vermonters. I will 
work with her to try and foster consensus not only in our region but 
also throughout the country.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, Gale Norton has a long public record and 
has written extensively on environmental issues over her career. I have 
reviewed that record and understand the concerns of those who have 
asked whether, as Secretary of the Interior, she would implement and 
defend environmental laws, many of which she has challenged or 
questioned in the past.
  That is the core question surrounding this nomination. It was put to 
Ms. Norton in a number of ways by members of the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.
  Ms. Norton testified that she is a ``passionate conservationist'' who 
will enforce the law as interpreted by the courts. I will vote to 
confirm her nomination, but I don't discount the seriousness of the 
concerns raised by her opponents. I intend to monitor closely her 
stewardship of the Department of the Interior.
  The duties of the Secretary of the Interior are profound, and have 
serious implications for the health of our nation's environment and the 
quality of life for millions of Americans. The Secretary is the primary 
guardian of the Endangered Species Act, our nation's flagship law for 
protecting plant and animal species threatened with extinction. The 
Secretary also is charged with administering most of our nation's 
public lands, including places of extraordinary beauty and fragility 
such as Yellowstone National Park.
  As Ms. Norton undertakes these responsibilities, it is my hope and 
expectation that she will follow the pragmatic approach reflected in 
her testimony before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Her 
success as Interior Secretary will be measured by the degree to which 
she maintains this balanced approach to environmental and natural 
resource issues.
  Our nation's environmental laws, including the Endangered Species Act 
and the National Environmental Policy Act, must be enforced fully, as 
they have been interpreted by the courts.
  In managing our natural resources, we should respect the views of 
local residents, but we must also recognize that the American people 
own these lands and that the Secretary must uphold the public interest 
as a whole.
  Ms. Norton has expressed confidence in the efficacy of allowing 
industries to police themselves when it comes to protecting the 
environment. History has shown too often that this approach fails to 
protect the public interest. Summitville, Colorado, is only one example 
of how insufficient oversight has led to environmental disaster. The 
map of the United States is dotted with other examples. It is my hope 
that, through this confirmation process and through her experience in 
public office, Ms. Norton has gained a better appreciation of the fact 
that the Secretary of the Interior's trust includes active enforcement 
of the nation's environmental laws.
  It is particularly important to me that Ms. Norton fully implement 
the biological opinion written by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
regarding the management of the Missouri River. The Fish and Wildlife 
Service has found that, unless the Corps of Engineers makes major 
changes in the operations of federal dams on the river, it will be in 
violation of the Endangered Species Act. Ensuring that the Corps makes 
the needed changes in the operations of the dams is a top priority for 
the upper Midwest, and for me personally. It is imperative that 
Secretary Norton follow through on the Fish and Wildlife Service 
recommendations so that they are adopted by the Corps.
  I also hope to work with Secretary Norton to preserve small wetlands 
and

[[Page 813]]

native prairie in South Dakota, both of which provide important habitat 
for wildlife. Tallgrass prairie preservation has been a remarkable 
success in my state, and the number of farmers seeking to participate 
in the program has outpaced the amount of available funding.
  Finally, I want to work with Secretary Norton to strengthen the 
Bureau of Reclamation. Vast areas of South Dakota lack potable drinking 
water. Federal projects funded by the Bureau of Reclamation such as the 
Mni Wiconi, Mid-Dakota and Lewis and Clark rural water systems are 
critical to the public health and economic vitality of our state. At 
current funding levels, however, it will be years before these projects 
can be completed. I urge the Secretary to give these projects the 
priority treatment they deserve.
  Ms. Norton faces some significant policy challenges at the Department 
of the Interior. I expect we will have our differences, such as on 
President Bush's support for opening the Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge for oil exploration and drilling. On those issues I anticipate a 
spirited debate. On many other issues, I am certain we will work 
closely together to protect and manage our nation's natural resources 
and honor our trust responsibilities to tribes.
  Gale Norton has my congratulations on her nomination and confirmation 
as Secretary of the Interior.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I rise today to speak in support of the 
nomination of Gale Norton to be the next Secretary of the Department of 
the Interior. Clearly the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee 
hearings on Gale Norton's nomination have revealed that she is a 
vivacious lawyer who contemplates and explores ideas. Concepts matter 
to her, and more importantly she has the management ability to turn 
concepts into public policies which have both enhanced compliance with 
environmental laws and respected the responsible stewardship of 
citizens who live on the land. Gale Norton knows there must be a 
balance and this will make her invaluable for America's conservation 
programs and for all our communities.
  Too often, some environmentalist groups only offer false choices. 
They only want a policy choice which pits the environment against 
citizens and industry. This is unacceptable. Some environmentalist 
groups also only want Washington ``experts'' making the decisions. 
Well, Gale Norton has repeatedly shown her commitment to a safe and 
clean environment through consensus building. For over 20 years, she 
has brought people together with different views to overcome problems 
dealing with environmental and Federal land issues.
  I have little doubt that Americans will see for themselves that Gale 
Norton will serve with a steady, firm and fair hand as our Nation's 
next Secretary of the Interior. I firmly believe our Nation's treasures 
will be both protected and improved.
  Americans will quickly discover just how harshly inaccurate many 
special interest groups' characterizations of her have been. Gale 
Norton has shown the grace and resolve that will help her restore the 
unanimity at the Department of the Interior.
  Mr. THOMAS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. THOMAS. Is there a couple minutes remaining before the vote?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. THOMAS. I yield to my friend from New Mexico.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I have spoken at length about the 
Interior Secretary nominee and also about our other nominee today, but 
I have not had a chance to say anything about the Environmental 
Protection Agency and the nominee, Christine Todd Whitman. I am very 
proud to make a statement for the Record that expresses my views.
  Mr. President, ``just as houses are made of stones, so is science 
made of facts; but a pile of stones is not a house and a collection of 
facts is not necessarily science.'' For the past 8 years I have 
questioned numerous collections of facts put out by the Environmental 
Protection Agency in the name of science. That is why I strongly 
support President Bush's nomination of Christine Todd Whitman as the 
new Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.
  President Bush has endorsed Christie Whitman as a person who 
understands the importance of a clean and healthy environment and who 
will ensure that environmental regulations are based, not merely on 
assembled facts, but on solid, sound science. Sound science has been 
left out of the regulation equation too often over the past 8 years. A 
prime example is the new arsenic standards proposed last week. These 
standards were not based on sound science and they were not implemented 
to increase health benefits, they were put into effect because it was 
the politically expedient thing to do.
  Arsenic is naturally occurring in my home state of New Mexico. I have 
not seen reasonable data in support of increased health benefits from 
these lower standards. I have only seen a collection of facts from 
studies conducted outside of the United States. New Mexicans will not 
see appreciable health benefits; they will see their water bills double 
and will be forced to endure financial hardship.
  Ms. Whitman has been an advocate of clean water, clean air and clean 
shores and while I know that she will continue to promote these things 
for all Americans, I am excited about the way she will champion these 
causes. I believe that she will promote scientifically valid 
initiatives to ensure that we have clean water, clean air and clean 
shores.
  In conjunction with sound scientific, Ms. Whitman also understands 
that better results can be achieved through a more cooperative, rather 
than a confrontational, approach with the regulated community. This too 
is consistent with the beliefs and philosophies of President Bush. 
President Bush has said that the federal model of mandate, regulate, 
and litigate needs to be modernized. Americans need to be rewarded for 
innovation and results when it comes to protecting the environment.
  Christie Whitman has worked extensively on environmental issues 
during her service as the New Jersey Governor. She has demonstrated her 
commitment to a safe and clean environment and shows that she is 
willing to bring all parties together in an effort to find solutions to 
complex environmental issues. She exemplifies the qualities of a 
consensus builder, not a divider.
  Environmental issues continue to be some of the most complex and 
contentious and require a leader who can balance various competing 
interests. Christie Whitman will bring this type of leadership into the 
Environmental Protection Agency.
  It is time to base our regulations on more than just a collection of 
facts. It is time to work together and to search for solutions that are 
based on scientifically valid facts. I look forward to working with Ms. 
Whitman in doing just that.
  As I have said, the Secretary of the Interior has important jobs 
besides just the Interior Department's functions. I say the same about 
Christine Todd Whitman. She will have a tough job because America is in 
an energy crisis. That means every Department of our Government is 
going to have to start looking not only at their policies but how do 
their policies affect America's energy future? She will have a 
difficult job because that has not been the case at EPA in the past. So 
I bid her well. I hope she has a very successful term because if she 
does, we will. If she adjusts some of her rulings to a bigger problem, 
and can make some cost-benefit assessments that are good for the 
environment, but also for energy, the energy supply, I think that will 
be a marvelous achievement.
  Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the nominations.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to 
be.
  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination 
of Gale Ann Norton to be Secretary of the Interior? The clerk will call 
the roll.

[[Page 814]]

  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Dorgan) 
is necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Crapo). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 75, nays 24, as follows:

                       (Rollcall Vote No. 6 Ex.)

                                YEAS--75

     Akaka
     Allard
     Allen
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cantwell
     Carnahan
     Carper
     Chafee
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Ensign
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     McCain
     McConnell
     Miller
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nelson (FL)
     Nelson (NE)
     Nickles
     Reid
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--24

     Bayh
     Biden
     Boxer
     Cleland
     Clinton
     Corzine
     Dayton
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Harkin
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Mikulski
     Reed
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Stabenow
     Torricelli
     Wellstone
     Wyden
       

                             NOT VOTING--1

       
     Dorgan
       
  The nomination was confirmed.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and I move to 
lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Let me make sure I understand. The vote was completed. The 
vote was announced, and has been dispensed with; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct and the nomination was 
confirmed.
  Mr. LOTT. Have the yeas and nays been asked on the next vote?
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, may we have order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. The Senate will come 
to order. Those having conversations will take their seats or remove 
themselves from the floor.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been ordered on the 
second vote on nominations?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not.
  Mr. LOTT. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.


                           Order Of Procedure

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, before we proceed, I ask unanimous consent 
that following the time allocated immediately following the back-to-
back votes, the Senate proceed to a period of morning business in order 
to debate the nomination of Senator Ashcroft to be U.S. Attorney 
General and the time between then and 9 o'clock tonight be equally 
divided between the two leaders or their designees. Further, I ask 
unanimous consent the next vote be limited to 10 minutes in length.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. There was so much noise, I do thank the distinguished 
senior Senator from West Virginia for asking for order.
  I did not hear the first part of the statement of my friend from 
Mississippi. We begin the debate on the Ashcroft nomination prior to 
even voting it out? Or was it in morning business?
  Mr. LOTT. It was in morning business.
  Mr. LEAHY. I have no objection.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________