Max Baucus

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, these are technical corrections that are necessary because of an earlier action that we took. It is clearly minor and technical and should be approved.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, this is an amendment not in our committee jurisdiction. It is a Commerce Committee amendment. It has been cleared by that committee. We, therefore, feel it should be adopted.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Daschle) is entirely correct. Advanced composites are one of many types of innovative materials this bridge research program was created to deal with. Would my distinguished colleague, the Chairman of the Committee (Mr. Chafee), agree with our assessment?

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I am advised we need to make a technical adjustment to an amendment just offered, which has been agreed to, an amendment offered by Senator Moseley-Braun. I also understand that Senator Faircloth would like to be added as a cosponsor.

Mr. BAUCUS. The Governor of Michigan, to say nothing of the Governors from some other States--Massachusetts, for example. I thank Senators Kennedy and Kerry for their hard work for their State, along with Senator Lautenberg from New Jersey and the Connecticut Senators. Senator Moynihan, who in many ways is the father of this bill, helped make sure there was a Northeast balance to the bill. And many other western Senators came to me and said, let's make sure this is fair to the West. I mentioned the donor States. On our committee, I would like also to thank Senator Boxer--she has pressed California's interests very ably--Senator Reid from Nevada; Senator Lieberman; Senator Lautenberg, who I also mentioned; Senator Graham from Florida--he is tenacious in fighting for Florida's interests, making sure, as a donor State it is not taken advantage of. But, again, it all came together in a very fair way. It sounds kind of platitudinous, but it is true. These Senators worked extremely hard for their States and at the same time, in the end, they worked together to make sure we would get a very strong bill. That is quite an achievement, frankly, as we move on to the next century, the next millennium. We are passing a major infrastructure bill--major. Every $1 billion of highway spending accounts for about 42,000 jobs. This bill is about $171 billion, roughly, over 6 years. When we finish with the House, it perhaps could be a few more dollars. Also, just in terms of making sure our highways are as up-to-date as possible, as any businessman knows, the better the condition of our roads and highways, the less congestion there is, the more money he is going to make, the more that helps his bottom line. This is going to help us be competitive in the next century. Again, I thank Senators for their great work. Amendment No. 2015, as modified

Mr. BAUCUS. My colleague says ``bulldogs.'' They are bulldogs. But they are, if possible--I am sure bulldog owners will think it's possible--fair bulldogs, once they charge ahead.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I have now been informed that Senator Moseley-Braun is on her way with an amendment, too. I have no idea what it is.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I have the changes in the amendment. I send them to the desk.

Mr. BAUCUS. I appreciate the gentleman's comments and understand his concerns. The Committee is aware of the importance of the Northern Great Plains states, including North Dakota, in moving traffic from north to south, as well as from east to west. The cooperation among the states in the region and the work being done with the government of the neighboring province of Manitoba will be important in applying for grants in the trade corridor program in the bill.

Mr. BAUCUS. The Senator from North Dakota accurately notes the important link between export opportunities and an adequate transportation infrastructure. The development of the transportation infrastructure is crucial to ensure that export products from not only the Northern Great Plains region but also the nation--and our neighboring countries--are able to reach their destinations in an efficient manner.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I would like to thank a group that has not been thanked yet. That is the Department of Transportation--Secretary Slater, Mort Downey, Kenneth Wykle, and others at DOT who I note are in the gallery. They are watching these proceedings. They have been a very integral part of the passage of this bill. We have gone to the Department of Transportation many times to get data, to get their assistance. I want to thank not only Senators and staff but also the Department of Transportation for their assistance.

Mr. BAUCUS. They are very tenacious in pressing for their States' best interests.

Mr. BAUCUS. It is also true you learn what a mosaic this country is and how each State's needs are unique. The New England States, for example, the Northeast States, have definite needs, obviously, with relation to the population density; relative donor States. Then, obviously, some of the Western States with public lands, some of the Indian roads. I compliment the Senators who worked very hard for their own States and who worked with the Senate to get a balance. One who comes to mind is Senator Levin, and Senator Abraham from Michigan.

Mr. BAUCUS. This is the amendment that makes sure the $15 billion is not contract authority but is authorization. I urge its adoption. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no further debate, the question is on agreeing to the amendment, as modified.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I want to pay a special tribute to the Senator who just spoke, Senator Warner of Virginia. This is the first opportunity I have had to work closely with the Senator from Virginia. When you work on a major bill like this, you get to learn a lot about the person you are working with. I want to just tell the Senator how much I appreciate his grace, style, honesty, dedication, efficiency in getting the job done, cooperation, making sure we touch all the bases, making sure we talk to the leader about this, better talk to the chairman about this and the ranking member of the Appropriations Committee, too; making sure all the bases are touched so we get a balanced, fair bill, one that is fair to everybody not only in the letter of the law but the spirit of it. Senator, you have done a great job and I want to thank you for that.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, the amendment here will extend current law so there will be no change in current law. The DBE Program now does apply to the mass transit title of the bill; that is, the mass transit portion of the law. The point of this amendment is to continue that program so it also applies to the mass transit title in the bill once the bill is finally passed.

Mr. BAUCUS. It is a needed program, particularly for high-speed rail crossings. I must say to the Senator that it is very important to address hazardous high-speed rail problems. It is also a problem, because tragically 2 days ago there was a bus accident at a rail crossing in my State of Montana where two schoolchildren were killed. It is devastating, as you might guess, to the families and to the school. It is a small school in central Montana. When we write this bill, we need to make sure that we address hazardous rail crossings across the country, as well as high-speed also.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I appreciate what the Senator said, but with the understanding that it is amended down at the lower amounts.

Mr. BAUCUS. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. BAUCUS. That is correct. But there is another exception making sure it's not contract authority but authorizing language.

Mr. BAUCUS

Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise, with some reservations, in support of the resolution offered by Senator Wellstone and Senator Mack. I have been visiting, debating and studying China for some years. And it is quite clear that human rights conditions in China can and should be far better. China admits to holding about 3,000 people in prison for ``counter- revolutionary'' offenses. We don't know the exact figure, but Amnesty International's estimate is similar. And political repression, over the past four or five years, has in some ways become more rather than less severe for the nation's most prominent dissidents. Treatment of religious leaders and labor organizers may be even worse. And repression seems to be at its harshest in some minority areas. Independent reports show that rates of imprisonment are higher in Tibet and Xinjiang, and violent response by the authorities is more common. Having visited Lhasa myself, albeit on a highly controlled visit, my personal impression backs up these reports of very severe policies. Those things are real. And the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva is the appropriate place for us, for China, and for the other nations of the world to discuss them. But we must also recognize something very important. That is, most long-term human rights trends in China are good. The number of people tried for political offenses is down from 350 a year in the mid-1980s to about 200 a year now. If you look further back, you see that during the so-called ``Anti-Rightist'' campaign in 1957, China arrested 500,000 people. The 1960s--the years of the ``Great Leap Forward'' and ``Cultural Revolution''--were even worse. Other indices also show an improving situation. The number of citizen lawsuits against the government is up from 4,600 in 1987 to approach 100,000 last year, showing that more people feel free to challenge the state. Uncensored news is available on the radio, satellite TV or the Internet. Local elections are becoming more democratic, and the National People's Congress is taking up a more confident role in making law and overseeing ministries. Likewise, China's economic reforms have created an entirely new world for tens or hundreds of millions of ordinary people. With open trade, they can find their own jobs, choose their own careers, rent their own apartments and listen to foreign news. And if you ask ordinary Chinese, most say without any hesitation that life is better and freer than ever before. So I think it is appropriate for the Administration to raise human rights, particularly the question of political prisoners, in Geneva. The Human Rights Commission in Geneva is the place to discuss, debate and if necessary, condemn violations of human rights abroad. But it is also the place to note and approve improvements of human rights abroad. And while I will support this resolution, I believe it is imperfect, because it does not call on the Administration to do both. The most effective approach to human rights will be to tell the truth--to point out areas where the government of China, or any other country, needs reform; but also to draw attention to the areas where life is getting better. We should do that in Geneva, and we should do it when we have occasion to debate human rights on the Senate floor.