[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 19283-19286]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                        STENNIS FELLOWS PROGRAM

  Mr. REID. Madam President, over the years, the Congress has created a 
number of programs to focus attention on important issues.
  Today I call attention to one of those programs, which is a testament 
to the life and career of the late Senator John C. Stennis.
  In 1988, Congress created the John C. Stennis Center for Public 
Service. The mission of the Center from its inception to the present 
has been to promote and strengthen public service leadership in 
America. The center accomplishes its goals through conferences, 
seminars, special projects and leadership development programs, one of 
which is the Stennis Congressional Staff Fellows Program.
  In each Congress, a bipartisan, bicameral group of senior 
congressional staff are each nominated by a Member and selected to 
participate in the fellows program. The fellows explore topics which 
address ways to improve the effectiveness of Congress.
  The 108th Fellows selected the topic that I think is quite 
appropriate: ``Building Greater Trust and Civility.''
  Over the course of the last 15 months, these fellows have heard from 
past Members of Congress, journalists and historians in their quest to 
fully explore this subject and suggest initiatives to restore some 
level of trust and civility--which appears to have deteriorated over 
the past several years.
  The work of the 108th Fellows is contained in a report which I would 
ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record.
  Mr. President, I urge all Members and their staff to take a look at 
the report, and perhaps we can return to a Chamber where there is more 
bipartisanship and collegiality.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                  Building Greater Trust and Civility

       A level of trust and civility is necessary for democracy to 
     work well and for governance to be effective. Without a basic 
     shared framework of mutual understanding, trust and civility, 
     legitimate public action is very difficult to initiate or 
     sustain. The 108th Congress Stennis Congressional Staff 
     Fellows--senior staff leaders drawn from both chambers and 
     from both sides of the aisle--worked together to explore the 
     core question: how to build greater trust and civility both 
     within Congress and across society?
       Successive groups of Stennis Fellows, beginning in the 
     103rd Congress ten years ago, have underlined that the 
     challenge of building trust and civility is becoming both 
     more important and more difficult in the face of 21st century 
     realities that include:
       The increasing fragmentation of our society, and growing 
     gaps between rich and poor, leading to a multiplication of 
     groups with very different values, assumptions and 
     worldviews, and too little life experience in common;
       A proliferation of single interest organizations advocating 
     narrow viewpoints;
       The burgeoning role of the media with its tendency to 
     accentuate conflict;
       Greater partisanship and polarization within Congress and 
     other governing institutions;
       The effects of a cascade of corporate scandals that 
     undermine confidence;
       A rising tide of public cynicism and mistrust of 
     institutions of all sorts (business, religious, charitable 
     and media as well as political);
       Increases in disrespect and rudeness, and a decline in 
     common courtesy that Americans report in their dealings with 
     government, business and each other; and
       A greater sense of insecurity and uncertainty in the 
     aftermath of 9/11 and in the midst of a war on terrorism that 
     may continue for a long time.
       As Stennis Fellows of the 108th Congress, we set and 
     pursued our own learning agenda within this broad theme, 
     looking ahead to the next ten years and focusing on ways to 
     build greater trust and civility both within Congress and 
     across society.

                            Learning Journey

       We were drawn in roughly equal numbers from the House and 
     the Senate and from both sides of the aisle, and represented 
     a diverse range of backgrounds and political perspectives. 
     Despite these very different starting points, Fellows quickly 
     found we could work together effectively and find common 
     ground, building on our shared respect and concern for the 
     institution of Congress. That common ground grew throughout 
     the period of Fellowship. In the words of one Fellow, ``It's 
     rejuvenating to find other people who actually care about 
     working across the aisle on big issues.'' Another Fellow 
     said, ``The Stennis Fellows are different people from 
     different backgrounds . . . yet so close in their beliefs and 
     feelings about the institution. If staff can bridge the gap 
     of trust and civility, so can Members.''
       To explore how best to build greater trust and civility 
     both within Congress and across society, we examined four 
     specific topics through a series of retreats, small group 
     meetings and roundtables with leading outside experts:
       Using dialogue to build trust;
       The historical context of trust and civility;
       Rules of engagement that impact trust and civility; and
       External influences on Congressional trust and civility.


                             Using dialogue

       Throughout the Fellowship we experimented with using 
     dialogue, which the 107th Congress Stennis Fellows had 
     recommended as one powerful way to build trust and civility 
     both within Congress and more broadly. We found that the best 
     way to understand dialogue is by contrasting it with its 
     opposite--debate or advocacy.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Advocacy/debate                         Dialogue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assuming that there is one right answer     Assuming that others have
 (and you have it).                          pieces of the answer
Combative: attempting to prove the other    Collaborative: attempting to
 side wrong.                                 find common understanding
About winning.............................  About finding common ground
Listening to find flaws and make counter-   Listening to understand and
 arguments.                                  find a basis for agreement
Defending your assumptions................  Bringing up your assumptions
                                             for inspection and
                                             discussion
Criticizing the other side's point of view  Re-examining all points of
                                             view
Defending one's views against others......  Admitting that others'
                                             thinking can improve one's
                                             own
Searching for weaknesses and flaws in the   Searching for strengths and
 other position.                             value in the other position
Seeking an outcome that agrees with your    Discovering new
 position.                                   possibilities and
                                             opportunities
------------------------------------------------------------------------

       A key to using dialogue effectively is to recognize that it 
     does not replace debate, advocacy, negotiation or decision-
     making; it precedes them. Dialogue creates the shared 
     language and framework, the mutual trust and understanding 
     that enable subsequent debate, negotiation and decisionmaking 
     to be more productive. Dialogue, in other words, is a step 
     that can be added where appropriate to create greater trust 
     and civility, better debate and better decision-making.
       We tried to practice dialogue during all sessions of the 
     Fellowship. In addition, many of us undertook experiments, 
     trying to apply dialogue on the job and then reporting the 
     results to other Fellows. Generally we found that dialogue 
     helped in a wide variety of practical circumstances, 
     especially when it could be applied before the debate or 
     negotiation had been fully engaged. It is a valuable tool 
     that we plan to use more widely and hope that others will 
     try.


                Key trends affecting trust and civility

       In the course of the Fellowship we identified a number of 
     key trends and changes over

[[Page 19284]]

     the last several years that have had a significant impact on 
     trust and civility both in Congress and society.
       1. The growing influence of the media, in particular the 
     24-hour news cycle, leading to:
       An oversimplification of complex issues into sound bites;
       An emphasis on conflict and confrontation;
       The demand for instant response with little time for 
     reflection; and
       The proliferation of news outlets with a partial 
     viewpoint--and, as more citizens rely only on those news 
     outlets whose perspective agrees with their own, a further 
     fragmentation in the understanding of issues across society.
       2. Greater social and cultural fragmentation (``Me The 
     People''), including:
       A decline in the perceived importance of the ``greater 
     good'' and of community;
       The growing power of special interests;
       The weakening or loss of mediating institutions; and
       The breakdown of shared standards of behavior and civility.
       3. A political culture of winning at any cost, 
     characterized by:
       Misuse of information to score political points;
       Using procedural rules to block majority rule and to stifle 
     minority views;
       Demonizing the opposition;
       Violations of unwritten rules, norms and traditions;
       Greater concentration of power in the hands of the 
     leadership;
       A weakening of the committee process;
       Less bipartisanship;
       A lack of genuine debate;
       Redistricting to create safe seats, where incumbents can 
     win by playing to their base and have little incentive (and 
     some real disincentives) to reach across the aisle; and
       The weakening of social bonds and trust between members of 
     different parties.
       4. Related to this divisive political culture is the 
     subordination of governing to what amounts to a permanent 
     campaign, which gives rise to:
       Greater emphasis on politics over policy substance;
       Growing reliance on polls;
       The effects of almost continuous campaign fundraising;
       The growth and influence of the political consulting 
     industry;
       Increases in the number and influence of special interests; 
     and
       All of which are reinforced by the close political margins 
     in both chambers.
       As a result of these trends and many more, Congress is 
     becoming less relevant, respected and trusted. Moreover, as 
     we looked ahead ten years and tried to imagine what the 
     situation would be like if we remain on this course; we saw a 
     future that few of us would want, characterized by:
       Greater polarization and a disappearance of the more 
     moderate middle of the political spectrum;
       Less focus on policy, more on politics and ``PR'';
       Even greater influence of money;
       More disconnected voters as public perception of Congress 
     deteriorates;
       Increased power of special interests;
       More segmented media playing to ever smaller sub-groups, 
     reinforcing social fragmentation and making a truly national 
     conversation ever more difficult; and
       Greater difficulty in attracting good people to serve in 
     Congress either as Members or as staff.


                            a better future

       Senator Stennis had a plaque on his desk inscribed with the 
     words, ``Look Ahead.'' It has become a motto both for the 
     Stennis Center and for the Fellows program. As the Fellows 
     began to ``Look Ahead'' to define the kind of future we would 
     like to see, we found much common ground that transcends the 
     boundaries of party and chamber. In particular, we would like 
     to see a future of strengthened trust and civility, in which 
     there would be:
       1. A more deliberative and bipartisan legislative process, 
     characterized by:
       Greater emphasis on policy over politics;
       Clearer separation between campaigning and governing;
       New and strengthened non-partisan oversight mechanisms;
       A stronger role for individual Members of Congress;
       Strengthened committees and subcommittees where substantive 
     deliberation can more easily occur,
       A more consistent committee work schedule (setting aside 
     consistent times when Members of Congress are in town to do 
     committee business);
       Increased efforts to develop and retain professional staff;
       More social interaction both among Members of Congress and 
     among staff across chamber and party lines;
       Developing the norm that bipartisan and bicameral 
     legislating is the desired process, with special recognition 
     and rewards for efforts that increase bipartisanship, trust 
     and civility.
       2. Enhanced public participation and a more engaged and 
     informed electorate:
       Encouraging voters to be more involved;
       Developing/re-empowering political parties at the 
     grassroots level;
       Making greater use of field hearings and other mechanisms 
     designed to foster more direct interaction with the public 
     outside of Washington.
       3. A stricter lobbying code of conduct with better 
     disclosure and assistance for groups who cannot afford 
     lobbyists;
       4. Better and more balanced media reporting;
       5. An end to the most extreme forms of negative campaigning 
     (campaigning that goes far beyond what is required to point 
     out distinctions between candidates);
       6. And generally better exchange, broader participation and 
     better dialogue, creating a legislative process that produces 
     better outcomes for the country and brings with it greater 
     respect for Members and for Congress.

                               Next Steps

       Moving toward a future with more trust and greater civility 
     will require:
       Increasing public engagement and participation;
       Strengthening deliberation within Congress; and
       Providing recognition and rewards for efforts that increase 
     trust and civility.
       The Fellows identified a number of practical steps that we 
     and others can take to advance these three goals (unless 
     otherwise indicated, we propose that each of these steps be 
     taken during first session of the 109th Congress if not 
     before).


             increasing public engagement and participation

       1. Congress should designate October as Civic Awareness 
     Month (this designation should be made before the end of the 
     108th Congress), which would include:
       Members visiting schools to talk about the election and 
     governance process;
       Schools organizing mock elections;
       Sponsoring student essay contests in each Congressional 
     District, with the winning entries to be inserted into the 
     Congressional Record;
       Developing a ``Junior Civic Leader'' program to encourage 
     school-age children to become more aware of civic 
     responsibilities;
        Activities by celebrities and the media to increase 
     awareness of civic responsibilities;
       Coordinated activities with state government; and
       Encouraging popular TV shows to do special episodes on 
     civic awareness.
       2. Create a bipartisan National Council on Voter/Citizen 
     Participation.
       The Council would provide an annual report to Congress on 
     ways to increase participation;
       Members would include the Congressional Leadership, 
     chairmen and ranking members of relevant committees, 
     representatives from the States, academics and other experts;
       Issues to examine include:
       Who is not participating and why?
       Does it make sense and would it help to adopt more non 
     partisan forms of redistricting, like the current process in 
     Iowa?
       How can or should new technologies, including the Internet, 
     be used to facilitate voting and participation?
       What kinds of awareness programs are most likely to help 
     (for example, a ``take your child or friend to vote'' 
     campaign)?
       Should the voting age be changed to 17, so students can 
     have their first voting experience (with their friends) 
     before they graduate from high school?
       Explore possible changes in the electoral calendar, for 
     example:
       Should the early voting period be longer and should 
     absentee or mail ballots be used more?
       Would it be helpful to change Election Day to the weekend 
     (as Louisiana does now)?
       Should the dates and the sequence of primary elections be 
     changed to increase voter interest (for example, rotating 
     which primaries come first)?
       Does it make sense to stagger poll opening and closing 
     hours in each time zone so that most polls open and close 
     simultaneously (as Canada has done recently), and/or to limit 
     or ban exit polls and the calling of elections before polls 
     have closed across the country?
       What are the best practices from other democracies, and 
     other ways to enhance citizen engagement from which we can 
     learn? Given the central responsibility of the States for 
     many of these questions, one product of the Council might be 
     a uniform election code that would then be submitted to the 
     States to consider.
       3. Authorize the Federal Election Commission to administer 
     challenge grants for the best efforts by different states to 
     increase participation.
       The FEC would submit a report on grants 180 days after the 
     election both to Congress and to the National Council on 
     Voter/Citizen Participation.
       The challenge grants program should be authorized from 2005 
     to 2010 and then reevaluated.
       4. Bring government to the people.
       Increase the use of field hearings, with local witnesses 
     and targeted outreach (starting in a non-election year).
       Develop an improved and consolidated web page for access to 
     all government information and services.
       5. Explore other means to increase citizen engagement and 
     improve dialogue with the public.

[[Page 19285]]




               Strengthening deliberation within Congress

       1. Conduct bicameral, bipartisan legislative policy 
     retreats for Members of Congress and staff.
       The Congressional Research Service should be designated to 
     provide support on organization, design, briefing papers, 
     experts, and logistics, with direction from the leadership 
     (CRS already runs programs for new Members).
       The norm should be established that all Members spend some 
     time at these retreats.
       Members' accounts would have an allocation for attendance 
     at legislative policy retreats that could not be used for 
     other purposes. If not used for a retreat these funds would 
     be returned to the Treasury.
       It will be essential to educate the media on the purpose 
     and value of these retreats.
       2. Make structural and procedural changes within Congress 
     to foster greater trust, civility and deliberation (begin in 
     the 109th Congress with full implementation by the 111th).
       The Congressional leadership should form a special task 
     force of senior Members of Congress and Parliamentarians to 
     review all House and Senate rules and protocols to better 
     protect both the rights of the minority to have a voice and 
     the rights of the majority to govern, and to encourage 
     greater deliberation, trust and civility.
       The special task force should also be asked to examine ways 
     to strengthen the role of committees as forums for 
     deliberation. For example:
       Should there be a requirement that no floor action be taken 
     until 5-10 days after a bill has been reported?
       Should one day each week be designated for committee work 
     only--no floor action on that day?
       Should attendance at committee meetings be reported 
     publicly, and should the press be encouraged to scrutinize 
     committee transcripts for attendance and votes?
       At the same time, the task force and the leadership should 
     encourage existing committees to promote greater trust and 
     civility:
       The focus would be on five committees--House and Senate 
     Rules Committees, House and Senate Ethics Committees, and the 
     House Administration Committee.
       Look for opportunities for these committees to work 
     together to improve overall trust and civility.
       The leadership should establish a priority legislative plan 
     at the beginning of each Congress listing the priority items 
     to be taken up in the first session and in the second session 
     (as the Senate generally does already). This plan would be 
     updated periodically as required to provide a shared 
     understanding of the leadership's legislative priorities.
       3. Encourage C-SPAN to provide more coverage of committee 
     hearings including field hearings (possibly even establish a 
     C-SPAN 4 for that purpose). Coverage should include in-depth 
     presentations by chairmen and ranking Members of committees, 
     followed by questions from experts and the public.
       4. Create more opportunities for relationship building 
     among Members of Congress and also among staff across the 
     boundaries of chamber and party.
       Hold more bipartisan field hearings and fact finding trips 
     that engage the public at the grassroots level--and find 
     better ways to ensure the press understands the value of 
     these efforts;
       Create more opportunities for Members of Congress and their 
     families to get to know each other and to build 
     relationships;
       Provide incentives to attract and retain professional staff 
     (for example, more professional development opportunities); 
     and
       Develop more programs like the Stennis Congressional Staff 
     Fellows, and explore the possibility of comparable programs 
     for Members of Congress.
       5. Establish a bipartisan blue ribbon commission to examine 
     ways to reduce the negative impact of the permanent campaign 
     and of campaign fundraising, and to recommend legislative and 
     structural changes that would reduce the influence of the 
     campaign in the legislative function. The commission would be 
     composed of former Members of Congress, parliamentarians, 
     former heads of Congressional campaigns, the media, and 
     others with relevant experience and expertise.
       The questions to be examined include:
       How can we ensure federal election law is fairly 
     implemented and fully enforced, and improve the efficacy, 
     efficiency and reliability of the Federal Election 
     Commission?
       Should there be and can there be restrictions on 
     fundraising during the legislative session?
       Should there be further restrictions on the degree to which 
     staff can be engaged in fundraising, and should the Hatch Act 
     be extended to Congressional employees?
       Are there other indirect ways to reduce the influence of 
     campaign funding.
       For example:
       Can the media help to reduce the importance of money, 
     through reporting on contributions and through provision of 
     airtime free or at reduced cost?
       Can greater citizen engagement be used to counter balance 
     the influence of money?
       To what degree can stricter and more immediate disclosure 
     of donations help?
       Should the tax credit for small contributions be reinstated 
     as a way to reduce the influence of large donors?
       What lessons can be learned from the ways in which other 
     democracies control the influence of campaign fundraising, 
     and separate campaigning and governing?


   Providing recognition for efforts that increase trust and civility

       1. Create prestigious awards to recognize efforts that 
     promote greater trust and civility in Congress.
       Create a selection panel composed of outstanding former 
     Members of Congress.
       Seek the cooperation of existing outside groups that might 
     co-sponsor awards.
       Engage the media in the process, possibly establishing a 
     Committee of Correspondents to participate in selection and 
     in raising the profile of the awards.
       The Stennis Center and Stennis Senior Fellows could provide 
     support in creating and administering these awards.
       Awards could be made to Members of Congress, committees, 
     subcommittees and staff.
       Multiple awards should be given in both the first and 
     second sessions of each Congress.
       2. Develop and implement a civility scorecard.
       Encourage an independent group such as the Congressional 
     Quarterly or National Journal to develop the scorecard.
       Encourage a major foundation to fund grassroots 
     organizations to promote greater civility, and possibly to 
     fund the scorecard.

                              Conclusions

       The steps toward greater civility and trust outlined in 
     this report are not meant to be comprehensive and, by 
     themselves, cannot resolve the challenge of building greater 
     trust and civility. It is important to be clear on these 
     limitations, because they also point to areas where others 
     can contribute much.
       As a practical matter we decided to focus our efforts on 
     changes within Congress, which is where we thought we could 
     make the biggest difference. As we have learned, though, lack 
     of trust and civility in Congress is closely related to 
     declining trust and civility in society, and both will need 
     to be addressed if we are to make lasting improvements.
       Even within Congress, there are critical issues we did not 
     have the time or resources to address in the depth they 
     require. Foremost among these is the role of the permanent 
     campaign and the negative effects of campaign fundraising. 
     These questions require much greater attention, and it is 
     important to find ways to do this without triggering more 
     partisan acrimony.
       In the end, as many of the experts with whom we met 
     emphasized, the levels of trust and civility within Congress 
     depend on the Members--in the words of one: ``We end up with 
     the kind of Congress the Members give us.'' Making changes 
     will depend ultimately on Members' determination that this is 
     an area where change is required.
       Nonetheless, we believe that the steps outlined in this 
     report can make a real difference, and we plan to work 
     together, following our period of Fellowship, to advance as 
     many of those ideas as we can. We have learned in carrying 
     out our day-to-day responsibilities that trust and civility 
     are more than nice things to have; they make a real 
     difference in what we can accomplish together. Moreover, if 
     changes are not made soon, we believe it will become more and 
     more difficult to find good people to serve on Capitol Hill 
     either as Members of Congress or as staff, further 
     undermining the ability of the institution to do its 
     essential job in our democracy.
       We came from both chambers, from both sides of the aisle 
     and from very different backgrounds, but in the course of our 
     Fellowship we found that our shared commitment to the 
     institution of Congress and its critical role in our 
     democracy far outweighed our differences. The Stennis 
     Fellowship provided an all too rare opportunity for us to 
     step outside of our normal roles, share experiences, explore 
     new ideas and learn from each other. It provided a space for 
     dialogue, within which we were able to build, in microcosm, 
     the kind of trust and civility we hope will grow more widely 
     both in Congress and across society. We also found that 
     maintaining the dialogue requires real work and attention--it 
     is easy to slip back into familiar patterns--but that the 
     increased trust, civility, insight and ability to work 
     together that result more than justify this effort.
       In the end, perhaps the best way to understand dialogue is 
     to experience it. We hope that many others in Congress can 
     have the sort of experience we have had during our period of 
     Fellowship, and that this sort of dialogue also can take 
     place more regularly not just in Congress, but in other parts 
     of our society and between Congress and the public. The need 
     is urgent to find ways to strengthen trust and civility both 
     within Congress and across society. To make a difference we 
     need to start from where we are. We each can make a 
     contribution from any starting point. We invite you to 
     consider what you can do to help address this challenge, 
     starting from where you are.


       meetings of the 108th congressional staff fellows program

       1. Fellows met first in July 2003 to get acquainted and to 
     define their Learning Agenda.

[[Page 19286]]


       2. To set the stage for exploring their Learning Agenda, 
     Fellows participated in a November workshop on ``Dialogue 
     Essentials'' led by Steven Rosell and Mark Gerzon from 
     Viewpoint Learning.
       3. The Fellows pursued their Learning Agenda in four 
     roundtables with outstanding resource persons:

   Historical Context: Changes in Trust and Civility (December 2003)

       Dr. Richard A. Baker, Senate Historian.
       Dr. Patrick Towell, Center for Strategic and Budgetary 
     Assessments.

   Rules of Engagement that Foster Trust and Civility (February 2004)

       Brian Lamb, Chairman and CEO, C-SPAN
       Burdett Loomis, Chair, Political Science Department, 
     University of Kansas.

  External Influences on Congressional Trust and Civility (March 2004)

       The Honorable David Skaggs Executive Director, Center for 
     Democracy and Citizenship Program, Council for Excellence in 
     Government.
       Ruth Wooden, President, Public Agenda.

    Rules of Engagement that Impact Trust and Civility (March 2004)

       The Honorable Dale Bumpers, Arent, Fox, Kintner, Plotkin 
     and Kahn, PLLC.
       The Honorable Bob Michel, Hogan and Hartson, LLP.
       4. Fellows visited the USS John C. Stennis aircraft carrier 
     at sea in November 2003 and March 2004.
       5. Fellows worked together first in small groups in May of 
     2004 and then at a two-day retreat and subsequent half-day 
     session in The Capitol in June to synthesize what they had 
     learned and to produce this report.


                     108th congress stennis fellows

       Richard A. Arenberg, Legislative Director & Deputy Chief of 
     Staff, Office of U.S. Senator Carl Levin.
       John M. Ariale, Chief of Staff, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Ander Crenshaw.
       Winfield Boerckel, Jr., Administrative Assistant/
     Legislative Director, Office of U.S. Representative Gerald D. 
     Kleczka.
       David Cavicke, Chief Counsel, Subcommittee on Commerce, 
     Trade, and Consumer Protection, House Committee on Energy and 
     Commerce.
       Jo-Ellen Darcy, Senior Policy Advisor, Senate Committee on 
     Environment and Public Works.
       Lula Johnson Davis, Assistant Secretary for the Minority, 
     Office of the Secretary for the Minority.
       Don DeArmon, Associate Staff for Appropriations, Office of 
     U.S. Representative Lucille Roybal-Allard.
       Bruce M. Evans, Staff Director, Subcommittee on Interior 
     and Related Agencies, Senate Committee on Appropriations.
       Beverly Ann Fields, Chief of Staff, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson.
       Gene T. Fisher, Legislative Director/Special Assistant for 
     Appropriations, Office of U.S. Representative Carolyn C. 
     Kilpatrick.
       Monique P Frazier, Legislative Director, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Mike Ross.
       Jennice Fuentes, Chief of Staff, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Luis Gutierrez.
       Christina Langelier Hamilton, Administrative Assistant, 
     Office of U.S. Representative David Obey.
       Elisabeth Wright Hawkings, Chief of Staff, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Christopher Shays.
       Clayton Heil, Legislative Director, Office of U.S. Senator 
     Thad Cochran.
       Robert Gregory Hinote, Chief of Staff, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Jim Cooper.
       Robert Holste, Administrative Assistant, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Phil English.
       Stacey Leavandosky, Legislative Director, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Lynn Woolsey.
       Evan Liddiard, Senior Tax Policy Advisor, Office of U.S. 
     Senator Orrin Hatch.
       Stephanie J. Monroe, Chief Counsel, Senate Committee on 
     Health, Labor and Pensions.
       Sue A. Nelson, Minority Deputy Staff Director, Senate 
     Committee on Budget.
       Janet Perry Poppleton, Chief of Staff, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Ralph M. Hall.
       Judy Schneider, Specialist on the Congress, Congressional 
     Research Service, Library of Congress.
       Russell Sullivan, Minority Chief Tax Counsel, Senate 
     Committee on Finance.
       Kristine Svinicki, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of U.S. 
     Senator Larry Craig.
       Alison Taylor, Minority Chief Counsel, Senate Committee on 
     Environment and Public Works.
       Paul Unger, Counsel and Legislative Director, Office of 
     U.S. Senator George Allen.
       Mark S. Wellman, Chief of Staff, Office of U.S. 
     Representative Paul E. Gillmor.


              stennis congressional staff fellows program

       The Stennis Congressional Staff Fellows Program, sponsored 
     by the Stennis Center for Public Service, is a practical, 
     bipartisan leadership development experience for senior-level 
     staff of the United States Congress. Established in the 103rd 
     Congress (1993-1994), the Stennis Fellows Program brings 
     together chiefs of staff, committee staff directors, 
     legislative directors, and others to explore ways to improve 
     the effectiveness of the institution of Congress. A new class 
     of 24 to 28 Stennis Fellows is selected competitively from 
     each Congress. A Member of Congress must nominate each 
     Fellow. The Fellows class is balanced with nearly equal 
     numbers from both political parties and both chambers.
       The Stennis Fellows Program focuses on the future 
     challenges of Congress as an institution and the leadership 
     role played by senior Congressional staff in meeting those 
     challenges. Stennis Fellows meet periodically over a fifteen-
     month period, and examine issues of their own choosing. The 
     program invites nationally and internationally renowned 
     experts to meet and dialogue with the Stennis Fellows. While 
     learning from these outside authorities is a unique 
     opportunity, a primary benefit of the program is the learning 
     and relationship building that takes place among the Stennis 
     Fellows themselves.


                   stennis center for public service

       The Stennis Center for Public Service was created by 
     Congress in 1988 to promote and strengthen public service 
     leadership in America. The Stennis Center is headquartered in 
     Starkville, Mississippi, with an office in Washington, DC 
     Programs of the Stennis Center are funded through an 
     endowment plus private contributions.
       The Stennis Center's mandate is to provide development and 
     training for leaders in public service, including 
     Congressional staff, and to attract young people to careers 
     in public service leadership. The Stennis Center accomplishes 
     its mission through conferences, seminars, special projects 
     and leadership development programs.

                          ____________________