[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 2461-2463]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                 UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--BANKRUPTCY

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, as most Members know, the Senate has been 
waiting for the Judiciary Committee to complete action on the very 
important bankruptcy bill for some time now. There is a long history 
behind it. As you recall, we passed the bankruptcy bill last year by a 
very wide margin, 70-28. The bill was eventually vetoed, even though, 
when I talked to the President personally about it, I had the 
impression that he had some hesitancy in vetoing it, but he did. And in 
view of the lateness of the hour, it was not overridden--an effort was 
not made to override it.
  So at the beginning of this session, it seemed to me this was a bill 
that had been worked through the meat grinder very aggressively and 
that we should move it very quickly. So my thought was we should file 
it and, under rule XIV, bring it directly to the floor of the Senate. I 
did not make any effort to do that in a surprising way. There seemed to 
be pretty broad agreement that that would be a reasonable way to 
approach it.
  However, there was some feeling by the ranking member on the 
Judiciary Committee that the committee should have a chance to have a 
look at the legislation. I discussed it with the

[[Page 2462]]

chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch. While he would have 
preferred that it go straight to the floor, he thought that was a 
reasonable request and that that would make the Members feel it was 
being done in a fairer way. So be it; that would be fine.
  All along, of course, I was talking to Senator Daschle, and we were 
talking about the best way to proceed, never wanting to surprise him at 
all. So it went to the Judiciary Committee. At that point then, there 
was an objection which delayed it for another week. And I thought the 
next week we would get it out. For a variety of reasons, without 
pointing fingers at anybody, it did not come out the week before the 
President's Day work period. Then I thought that this week we would get 
to it.
  I think the committee needs to be congratulated because the committee 
worked yesterday, it worked again today, and it completed its work. I 
do not know how many amendments actually were considered, but they 
dealt in some way with as many as 30 amendments and I guess voted on a 
whole lot of them. They reported out the bill today, so we are ready to 
go. I hope we can get to the substance of the bill and have a full and 
free debate--amendments will be offered, considered, and voted on--and 
then we will bring this legislation to conclusion.
  This is a part of my extraordinary, good-faith effort, I say to the 
distinguished Senator from Minnesota, to make sure we go by regular 
order--let the committees do their job, be considerate of other 
Senators' wishes, be considerate of the chairman of the Judiciary 
Committee, be considerate of the ranking Democrat on the committee, and 
confer with my colleague, Senator Daschle, the leader of the Democrats 
here in the Senate, to make sure he is aware of what I am thinking, and 
ask for his help. And he has given it.
  So I really bent over backward. It is part of this atmosphere we are 
trying to create--bipartisanship, working together. As we look toward 
bringing education to the floor, and campaign finance reform to the 
floor, and the budget resolution, I am doing everything I can to set a 
tone where everybody can make their case. Everybody will have that 
opportunity. But I must say, I am really getting frustrated. However, I 
am ever hopeful that my gentle nature and my plaintive plea will appeal 
to the Senators who might have some reservations about us moving to 
consider this bill.
  So, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate begin 
consideration of the bankruptcy bill, reported out of the Judiciary 
Committee today, at 10 a.m. on Thursday.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. REID. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. LOTT. I am glad to yield to the distinguished assistant minority 
leader.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I say to the majority leader, we know the 
strong feelings the Senator from Minnesota has, and we respect that 
wholeheartedly.
  I had one problem with the bill that dealt with something that was 
offered on the floor by Senator Schumer and me dealing with clinic 
violence. It went to conference. They stripped it, even though it 
passed here by an extremely wide margin.
  The Judiciary Committee put that in yesterday. It is in the bill that 
will come before the Senate. I am very grateful to Senator Leahy, who 
worked so hard on this matter, and the entire Judiciary Committee for 
allowing it to be part of this bill.
  I believe it is a much better bill with this provision in it. It was 
not in the bill when it came to the floor out of conference. I voted 
against it. I am appreciative of what the Judiciary Committee has done 
in this regard.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I will be glad to yield to the Senator from 
Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I will follow our minority leader. I 
wanted to respond to what the majority leader said, but I will follow 
the leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I would prefer to follow the senior Senator from the 
State of Minnesota.
  Mr. LOTT. To help with all this, why don't I yield the floor. I will 
stay to participate because I have a feeling the Senator from Minnesota 
is going to be persuaded by the generous nature of his leader and my 
persuasive abilities to let us get to the substance of the bill. I know 
with this Senator from Minnesota, I have heard him time and time again 
say: I have a right as a Senator to make my case and offer my 
amendments. I believe he will remember on occasion I have supported his 
right to be able to do that. He will have his right. But to delay this 
bill another week, what does it accomplish? We could begin to make 
progress, and we could have a vote on amendments.
  I wish he would reconsider. This is on the motion to proceed. I think 
the American people look at us and say: Excuse me? You are going to 
have a cloture vote to cut off a filibuster on the motion to proceed to 
the bill; then you are on the bill and you have to do it again?
  I hope the Senator will relent. I yield the floor to see what the 
Senator has to say.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I won't be long. I thank the majority 
leader for his graciousness, even though we are in disagreement. I 
appreciate not only what he said but the way he said it.
  It is extremely important that to the maximum extent possible we work 
together. This bill is going to come to the floor of the Senate; there 
is no question about it. There are going to be votes. As a Senator from 
Minnesota, I will use this occasion. Perhaps we will have discussion 
tomorrow and can reach some agreement about how to move forward. Let me 
say that to the majority leader.
  This is an opportunity for me to say to other Senators and, more 
importantly, to the people of Minnesota, this bill is harsh and one 
sided. I cannot believe that we make it so difficult for people who 
find themselves in such difficult circumstances. Fifty percent of the 
people of the country who declare bankruptcy do it because of a major 
medical expense. Almost all the rest of the cases are because of 
someone losing a job or because of a divorce.
  I will not speak long, but I want the majority leader to know how 
heartfelt my objection is. It is not just a question of procedure or 
inside baseball in the Senate. I don't want to miss an opportunity to 
talk about how harsh and mistaken this piece of legislation is.
  We just had 1,300 LTV workers laid off work in northeast Minnesota. 
The way this bill reads, in terms of what they can file for chapter 7, 
they are supposed to look at the average of their income over the last 
5 months. That doesn't help them. Many of them just lost their jobs. I 
don't want them to go under. I want them to be able to rebuild their 
lives.
  In my not so humble opinion, this is a classic example of a financial 
services industry with enormous clout putting on a full court press. I 
am proud, working with other Senators, to have held them off and held 
them off. This bill may pass. It doesn't ask these credit card 
companies to be accountable at all. It does not deal with some of the 
worst circumstances that affect families that are going to go under. It 
has an onerous means test. It is extremely one sided.
  The first piece of legislation we are going to pass in the Senate, as 
the economy begins to go down and people are worried about losing their 
jobs and are feeling the economic squeeze, is a piece of legislation 
that is going to make it practically impossible for many families that 
are going under, through no fault of their own, to file for chapter 7 
and rebuild their lives. What a start.
  I come to the floor to object because I believe this is an egregious 
piece of legislation. The majority leader has been gracious to me. He 
knows I have the right, as does the minority leader, to object.
  I say to the majority leader: This is tonight. Because he has been 
gracious,

[[Page 2463]]

we can talk tomorrow and maybe we can figure out a way that we can 
proceed. However, I am not going to give up my opportunity to talk 
about how harsh this legislation is, and I am not going to give up my 
opportunity, in every way I can, to point out the weaknesses. There 
will be plenty of opportunity next week as well.
  I hope when we do move forward--and this is something I want to 
discuss with the leader--there will be the opportunity for amendments, 
and we will have a full-scale debate; we will operate as a Senate, 
which is what the majority leader and minority leader want us to do. 
For tonight, I have to object, and I object for those reasons.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, once again, we hear the eloquent passion 
of a Senator who cares deeply about an issue. I applaud him for that 
passion and his compassion for those who are now out of work as a 
result of layoffs in Minnesota. I understand how deeply felt his views 
are.
  He has expressed, in his own eloquent way, that it is within his 
right to object tonight. Each Senator has enormous power to stop 
things. Each Senator has enormous power to change the legislative 
process.
  The majority leader, on several occasions, could have thwarted this 
process, avoided regular order, prevented Senators from the opportunity 
that I believe we will have next week to offer amendments. He could 
have done a number of things using his rights, first as a Senator and, 
secondly, as a leader, to undermine what we have delicately constructed 
here in this new bipartisan environment. He could have done that. 
Senator Lott chose not to do that.
  The majority leader said, in keeping with the spirit we are trying to 
maintain, as much as I wanted to go to this bill 3 weeks ago, last 
week, the week before, as many times as we have talked about this, 
every time I have asked him, he has said: Look, I am going to try to 
maintain the kind of spirit that we have been able to create so far 
where we can have a win-win; Senators who are passionately opposed to 
this bill ought to have the right to express themselves, ought to have 
the right to offer amendments, ought to have the right to have a good 
debate; Senators who want to move this process along ought to be able 
to use the tools available to them to do that as well.
  What we are trying to do is to strike a delicate balance because 
there is passion on both sides. There is a depth of feeling on both 
sides. I, frankly, have been on both sides because I am so ambivalent 
about the importance of the arguments raised by the Senator from 
Minnesota as well as the concern that I have for the abuse we find in 
the system.
  I appreciate very much the Senator from Minnesota expressing himself 
and at least giving us the possibility that we could revisit this issue 
tomorrow, and I recognize, once again, that if every Senator exercised 
all of their rights, we probably wouldn't get much done in this body.
  But because everybody uses common sense, attempts to strike a balance 
between exercising those rights and moving along the legislative 
process, generally, we have worked out things in a way that has 
accommodated the needs of most people. It is in keeping with that 
spirit that I hope we can talk to the issue again tomorrow. I thank the 
Senator from Minnesota, and I thank the majority leader.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I appreciate the comments of the Senator 
from South Dakota. He has been working with me in good faith. We 
communicate regularly. We have to keep trying to do that. That is why I 
sense that he feels the same frustration that I do, that we both try to 
bend over backward to accommodate everybody, and it is still very 
tough. We are facing further delays.
  I am encouraged. The Senator from Minnesota has indicated we can talk 
tomorrow, and we will look for a way to move this legislation forward 
in a way that is acceptable hopefully to him and everybody else. I will 
look for him tomorrow.
  There are two points I want to make. The first bill we pass in the 
Senate this year is not going to be the bankruptcy bill. I think the 
first one we passed was pipeline safety. It is good legislation, 
broadly supported. We passed one other bill that week. I think pipeline 
safety was the first one.
  The other thing is that I understand how the Senator feels, and you 
have to have some emotions and compassion for people who get into 
difficult straits. There needs to be a way for them to come out of them 
and get a job or have a job and get back into business. Also, this is 
personal with me, too. My mother and father tried to be small business 
owners. My dad was a pipefitter in the shipyard. It was hot, tough 
work. He decided they could get into the furniture business at one 
point. He would go pick up the furniture in his pickup truck and bring 
it back to the store. It was Market Street Furniture Company. I will 
never forget it. He would do the selling and delivering, and they sold 
a lot of items on credit. My mother was the bookkeeper in the back of 
the store. One of the reasons why they could not make it was that many 
of those people to whom they sold the furniture on credit just would 
not pay their bills.
  So there is another side. There are small business men and women who 
wind up holding the bag, and when you are a small business man or 
woman, that profit margin is pretty tiny. It is 5 percent, 10 percent 
maybe. But I remember it was very small in that furniture store.
  There were other factors involved, but eventually it ran them out of 
business. My dad went back to the shipyard, and he got to work in the 
pipe department. But that is the other side of the coin.
  What about the small business men and women who are out there trying 
to create jobs to help their family and people say, ``We don't want to 
pay"? A lot of them hide behind bankruptcy.
  I have supported bankruptcy laws and reform of bankruptcy laws. I 
supported the bankruptcy judges system. But we have made it too easy 
now for people to use bankruptcy as an excuse to hide and get out of 
paying what they owe. There is broad, bipartisan support on this. I 
think we ought to get it done as soon as we can. I will work with the 
Senator to make sure he believes his voice was heard. I know how he 
feels about it personally. I do, too. There is another side of that 
coin. It is kind of a family thing with me. We will find a way to get 
it done.
  I thank Senator Daschle and Senator Reid for staying on the floor and 
working through this.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I don't want to debate the majority 
leader tonight. I want him to know that one of the good things about 
the very important debate we are going to have is that I will be able--
the Presiding Officer is involved in this debate as well--to cite 
independent study after independent study showing that the abuse, when 
it comes to bankruptcy, is a very small percentage. I think the 
majority leader will be pleased to hear that given the comment he made. 
We will have the debate. I thank the majority leader.

                          ____________________