Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Immigration, of the Committee on the Judiciary, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, February 6, 1966, at 10 a.m., to hold a hearing on the the use of SSI and other welfare programs by Immigration.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, in connection with the issue that is before the Senate today, I hope Senators will be able to support the petition to invoke cloture so we can have a vote on the merits of amendments to and the farm bill itself, that will put in place a farm program for this and later years. This farm bill that is being presented to the Senate, and which we will reach if we are able to invoke cloture today, is a compromise that has been developed to resolve the current impasse between the Congress and the administration about the content of farm legislation. As Senators remember, we included in the Balanced Budget Act the provisions of farm legislation that would be in effect over the 7-year period that was covered by the Balanced Budget Act of 1995. The Congress passed that and sent it to the President and he vetoed it. Because of that veto, we are now forced to go back and reexamine those provisions relating to agriculture and to pull them out and put them together in a freestanding bill so we can pass that legislation. If we do not, laws that have been on the books since 1938--and 1949, in some cases--will govern the agriculture programs that would be in place for this crop year. These provisions are so out of date it is ludicrous. The price support for wheat farmers would go up to about $7- something a bushel. In order to qualify, you would have had to have had allotments that were based on your planting experience prior to 1950. It is unthinkable that this Congress is dragging its feet and making it difficult to enact farm legislation that would give producers of American agriculture products the certainty of the laws that govern the planting and the production of those crops. But that is what is happening. It is a disgrace. We need to put a stop to it, and to put a stop to it we are going to have to vote for cloture to limit debate of this issue so we can get to votes on the merits of amendments and the bill itself, and to pass the legislation, send it to the House, meet in conference, and get a bill to the President. This has to be done as soon as possible. Farmers are confronted right now with the inevitability of a planting season that is here, whether we legislate it or not. We cannot slow down the planting season by simply not enacting farm legislation. Lenders are going to have to extend credit based on some idea of what the returns will be in this production year for wheat and corn farmers and others who are covered by these laws. I am hopeful that the Senate will recognize our solemn responsibility to be fair with farmers and to undertake our obligation to legislate in a serious manner and stop the partisan squabbling back and forth on who has the better program, the Democrats or the Republicans. Forget it. This bill before the Senate is a bipartisan substitute for the previous provisions that were before the Senate last week when the Senate failed to invoke cloture, when only 53 Senators voted for cloture. Now we have another chance. We need 60 Senators to vote to permit us to reach the amendments and then the merits of this bill. I urge Senators to look at the fact that we have made some fundamental changes to attract a large majority of support here in the Senate. There is a reauthorization of food and nutrition programs in this bill. There is a reauthorization of the Conservation Reserve Program in this bill. There are revisions and a reauthorization of a wetlands reserve program that has support from many sectors of this country. And there are other provisions--an authorization for a compact of New England States to join together to provide for themselves a new dairy program. There are other items in this bill that reflect an effort to reach out and broaden the base of support for this legislation. I hope Senators will vote for cloture so we can get on with the discussion of amendments and the vote on final passage. If Senators do not like some of these provisions, they can offer amendments to them to strike them, and we can have up-or-down votes on them. But let us get past this point in the debate and vote for cloture on this bill. Mr. GREGG addressed the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to provide a specific exemption for houseparents from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. This bill will provide significant relief to orphanages and group homes throughout the United States. Houseparents are men and women who work and live in a group home setting to care for, nurture, and supervise children. These children may live at the home for any number of reasons. They may be abused, neglected, orphaned, or homeless. The importance of houseparents in providing a family-like, healthy environment for these children cannot be overstated. It is the love, hard-work, and dedication of these people that enables the children at the home to enjoy a caring and stable environment. As compensation for their services, houseparents receive a very unconventional package of benefits, including a fixed annual salary, food, housing, and transportation. The Department of Labor, however, has determined that these men and women are also entitled to overtime wages. For example, in Mississippi, the Department of Labor determined that since houseparents at a particular home answered long-distance calls, opened out-of-State mail, and took the children on trips across the State line that houseparents were engaged in commerce and therefore covered by the minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. This interpretation has threatened the houseparent system by placing an unbearable burden on the extremely limited resources of non-profit group homes. The legislation I am introducing today will remedy this situation by providing nonprofit group homes with a specific exemption for houseparents from minimum wage and overtime requirements. Without such an exemption, these homes would be forced to use a shift model of employment where quasi-houseparents work 8 hour shifts to care for the children. This alternative would not furnish the same family-like setting for these children that the houseparent system provides. It is important to note that this measure creates only a very narrow exemption from the Fair Labor Standards Act. This bill would only exempt those houseparents who meet the following criteria: First, the houseparents must be employed by nonprofit homes; second, the group home in question must be the children's primary residence; third, the houseparents must reside with the children at the home for a minimum of 72 hours per week; and fourth, the houseparent must receive board and lodging from the home, free of charge, and be compensated, on a crash basis, at an annual rate of not less than $8,000. This legislation will allow nonprofit group homes to continue to provide the best possible care for children. I hope my colleagues will carefully consider it and join me in support of its enactment.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to provide a specific exemption for houseparents from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. This bill will provide significant relief to orphanages and group homes throughout the United States. Houseparents are men and women who work and live in a group home setting to care for, nurture, and supervise children. These children may live at the home for any number of reasons. They may be abused, neglected, orphaned, or homeless. The importance of houseparents in providing a family-like, healthy environment for these children cannot be overstated. It is the love, hard-work, and dedication of these people that enables the children at the home to enjoy a caring and stable environment. As compensation for their services, houseparents receive a very unconventional package of benefits, including a fixed annual salary, food, housing, and transportation. The Department of Labor, however, has determined that these men and women are also entitled to overtime wages. For example, in Mississippi, the Department of Labor determined that since houseparents at a particular home answered long-distance calls, opened out-of-State mail, and took the children on trips across the State line that houseparents were engaged in commerce and therefore covered by the minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. This interpretation has threatened the houseparent system by placing an unbearable burden on the extremely limited resources of non-profit group homes. The legislation I am introducing today will remedy this situation by providing nonprofit group homes with a specific exemption for houseparents from minimum wage and overtime requirements. Without such an exemption, these homes would be forced to use a shift model of employment where quasi-houseparents work 8 hour shifts to care for the children. This alternative would not furnish the same family-like setting for these children that the houseparent system provides. It is important to note that this measure creates only a very narrow exemption from the Fair Labor Standards Act. This bill would only exempt those houseparents who meet the following criteria: First, the houseparents must be employed by nonprofit homes; second, the group home in question must be the children's primary residence; third, the houseparents must reside with the children at the home for a minimum of 72 hours per week; and fourth, the houseparent must receive board and lodging from the home, free of charge, and be compensated, on a crash basis, at an annual rate of not less than $8,000. This legislation will allow nonprofit group homes to continue to provide the best possible care for children. I hope my colleagues will carefully consider it and join me in support of its enactment.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished friend, the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, for yielding to me. I urge the Senate to approve this Agricultural Market Transition Act. We are confronted with an emergency. It is essential that farmers know immediately what the farm programs for this crop year will be. Farmers are unable to make the decisions that must be made about what to plant or how much to plant, with the current uncertainty of this year's farm law. If we fail to pass a new farm bill, wheat and feed grain farmers will be operating under the provisions of the 1938 and 1949 agricultural acts. There will be no rice program. This forces the Secretary of Agriculture to announce a new rice program under the authority he has under the 1948 Commodity Credit Corporation. And while cotton, peanut, and sugar titles of the previous farm bill would continue for the 1996 crop-year, a great deal of confusion and possible economic hardship for many of our Nation's farmers could result. The Department of Agriculture has even suggested that this chaos could add $10 to $12 billion to the cost of farm programs this year. This is just not acceptable for either farmers or the taxpayers. So I urge the Senate to act favorably on this cloture vote so we can have a vote on the bill, S. 1541, to continue the commitment to protecting public and private investments in production agriculture and in rural America. I am pleased that the bill includes, with the support of the chairman, the Marketing Loan Program that has proved so workable and helpful in the rice and cotton areas. There are also other provisions that have been tried and tested and proven to be helpful to your effort to compete effectively in the international marketplace with our strong agriculture sector. Our farmers are ready to go to work, but they need to know what the programs are going to be so they can make rational and thoughtful decisions. The Government's role in providing stability and an orderly transition to a market economy in agriculture is very important and will be carried forward and implemented in this bill. It does it fairly and with a clear-cut commitment to curb spending. I urge my colleagues to vote for cloture so we can get a vote on this bill.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, for the information of Senators, the Senate will be in session for a period of morning business today until the hour of 4 p.m. The time will be divided equally between both sides, with 2 hours for the Republican side and 2 hours under the control of the Democrats. There will be no rollcall votes during today's session. The Senate may consider any legislative items that can be cleared for action by unanimous consent. All Senators should be reminded that the continuing resolution expires on Friday. It is expected, therefore, that the Senate will consider a new continuing resolution when one becomes available from the House. The Senate may also consider the Department of Defense authorization conference report as well as the START II Treaty. Senators should be on notice that based on preliminary responses from both sides of the aisle, it appears at this time that rollcall votes will occur during Friday's session of the Senate. However, we do not expect them to occur prior to the hour of 2 p.m. on Friday.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. I appreciate the kind comments of the Senator from North Dakota. I just want to say, too, I agree with him that some changes are indicated. We just do not want the status quo. I think we can do better than the status quo. There is too much insistence on the status quo right now from the administration on a number of subject areas, vetoing a number of initiatives for change and for improvement of programs. We have some very good improvements in the agriculture programs included in that Balanced Budget Act, and to just say that we are not going to consider that I think would be a big mistake. So I was heartened by the comments the Senator made about the fact that he would suggest in his legislation changes for more flexibility, for more sensitivity to the realities of the current situation in agriculture. We have had a lot of changes. We have had higher commodity prices in a number of areas. But we do need to get on with it. I applaud the Senator and assure him that my interest, this Senator's interest, is working in a positive way to reach agreement so we can put it in place. I am glad he is going to introduce legislation along that line.

Mr. COCHRAN. Will the Senator yield for a response?

Mr. COCHRAN. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, one of the things that I learned when I was back in my State was that there is serious concern in the agriculture community about the failure to have a farm bill in place before this new crop season begins. Already, farmers are having to make decisions about the kinds of activity that they will pursue on their lands this year, and without the guidance of the provisions as to agriculture programs from the Government, a lot are put in a position of having to guess and to simply operate on the basis of faith in the fact that Government might come to some agreement on agriculture programs sometime this crop year. It was one of the casualties of the veto by the President of the Balanced Budget Act that we do not have in place now commodity programs to guide our agriculture producers in making their decisions. Lenders are reluctant to make loans for funds to begin the operations of this crop year without that same kind of certainty, as well. What I am suggesting is that another high priority for legislative action, as soon as possible, in addition to the conference report on the defense authorization bill mentioned by our majority leader, is action on a farm bill, or action that will put in place some temporary arrangement for income protection, the other provisions that are usually found in commodity programs in the Agriculture Act. One suggestion that I know is being discussed today among House and Senate Members is whether or not this continuing resolution that could come over from the House include provisions of the Balanced Budget Act as they pertain to the agriculture programs. That is something that is being discussed. I do not know how that will come out in terms of trying to get bipartisan agreement. I support that. We have passed that twice now in the House and in the Senate. It was part of the Balanced Budget Act sent to the President. I hope we can come to some resolution of this. I urge the Senate and particularly those on our Committee on Agriculture to weigh in with their thoughts and advice and counsel on this subject so we can reach a decision at the earliest possible time. We will put at risk, Mr. President, a lot of farmers all over the country--not just in my State but all over the country--who do not know what the program is going to be. Is there going to be a program? The Secretary says he will implement himself a rice program if no action is taken by the Congress. In my State, that is an important commodity. What is the program going to be? We do not know. I think it is an obligation, and it would be a very serious act of irresponsibility if this Congress does not soon settle on a farm program for this crop year, put it in place in the statute book, and let this agriculture sector of ours, which has become so productive and so important to our national pride, continue to flourish and to do so in an environment of partnership with the Federal Government to make sure that it continues to be a successful part of our national economy.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, it is becoming more obvious every day that the White House is not prepared to reach an agreement with the Congress to balance the budget. We have not seen any specific proposal from the administration to make any changes that would, in fact, lead to a balanced budget. They are unnecessarily shutting down Government services and programs and furloughing Government workers. The Congress must now act to identify the activities that should be funded and pass legislation that puts people who are really needed back to work. There has been too much political grandstanding. It is time for that to end. We should not give up our goal of getting spending under control and balancing the budget. That probably means electing a new President later this year who will cooperate with the Congress in this effort. In the meantime, I am prepared, and I know other Senators are prepared to work with the Republican majority and with like-minded Democrats to get the Government back in business with reductions in those programs that should be cut back, and to resolve this impasse. Mr. SARBANES addressed the Chair.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, yesterday the Senate passed, at my request, a resolution commending Brett Favre, from my State, who was named earlier this week as the most valuable player in the National Football League. Brett, as Senators know, is the quarterback of the Green Bay Packers. When I introduced the resolution, I did so on my behalf and Trent Lott, as a cosponsor. I learned, after adopting the resolution, that the two distinguished Senators from Wisconsin wanted their names to be added as cosponsors of the resolution. I looked at the Record and it does reflect that later in the Record. I wanted to make a point of saying that I had not received that information at the time the resolution was submitted and passed by the Senate. I was going to ask unanimous consent that the distinguished Senators Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold be added as cosponsors, but that is reflected in the Record. So I am pleased that they joined us in the resolution commending and congratulating Brett Favre for the great honor that he received. (At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk commending J. Keith Kennedy for his service as Republican staff director of the Appropriations Committee and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that the injunction of secrecy be removed from the Tax Protocol for the Kingdom of the Netherlands (Treaty Document No. 104-23), transmitted to the Senate by the President on January 3, 1996; and ask that the treaty be considered as having been read the first time; that it be referred, with accompanying papers, to the Committee on Foreign Relations and ordered to be printed; and that the President's message be printed in the Record.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, it is with much pride that I submit a resolution congratulating Brett Favre for his outstanding accomplishment in being named the Most Valuable Player of the National Football League for 1995. Brett is a native of my State of Mississippi. He grew up in the Kiln community near the Mississippi Gulf Coast and starred as a student and athlete at Hancock Central High School. He first received national attention as quarterback for the University of Southern Mississippi, where he led his team to victories over such nationally ranked powers as Florida State University, University of Alabama, and Auburn University. This year, Brett Favre set a National Football Conference record of 38 touchdown passes and 4,413 total yards passing during the regular season. This is the third highest number of touchdown passes in a season in NFL history. He threw three more touchdown passes in Sunday's 37 to 20 first round playoff victory over the Atlanta Falcons. Ironically, Brett was chosen for MVP over another outstanding Mississippian and NFL star, Jerry Rice. Jerry Rice is generally considered the best wide receiver and pass catcher in modern history. His accomplishments were noted when he was named MVP of the Super Bowl in 1987. Brett Favre's rise to the top of his profession in four seasons is a testament not only to his ability, but to his courage and determination to excel. Brett Favre has proven himself a leader and top performer in every capacity and his achievements during the 1995 season were awesome. I urge the Senate to join me in giving special recognition to this exceptionally talented young man and congratulating him upon receiving one of the highest honors awarded in his profession. I ask unanimous consent that the article about him and his award that appeared in the Clarion Ledger, January 2, 1996, be printed in the Record.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate turn to consideration of Senate Resolution 207, a resolution submitted earlier today by myself and Senator Lott.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in recess until the hour of 11 a.m. on Thursday, January 4, 1996; that following the prayer, the Journal of proceedings be deemed approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and there then be a period for morning business until the hour of 12 noon, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand in recess under the previous order.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, negotiations will continue tomorrow on the Balanced Budget Act by the year 2002. However, rollcall votes are not expected during Thursday's session of the Senate.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I support this legislation which makes clear that it is the intent of Congress that all furloughed Federal workers, including federally funded State workers, affected by the shutdown of the Federal Government receive their pay. The Congress adopted furlough pay language as part of the continuing resolution, House Joint Resolution 122, to provide compensation to Federal Employees affected by the recent 6-day Government closure. The continuing resolution has been interpreted by some to not cover all employees who were affected by the Government closure. For instance, there are State employees paid with 100 percent Federal funds who make disability determinations and administer unemployment insurance benefits who may not be covered by the language in the continuing resolution regarding the payment of employees who were subject to furlough. This legislation ensures that 100 percent federally funded State employees affected by the furlough receive their pay as Congress intended, and that States using their own funds to make up for the lack of Federal funds for these employees are reimbursed to carry out 100 percent federally supported functions. I urge my colleagues to support this measure.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. 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.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, it is very reassuring to this Senator to see the Congress work out this continuing resolution as it has done over this past weekend providing for the continued funding of the departments of the Government that had not been funded through the passage of regular appropriations bills. There has been a great deal of confusion over what the issues were and why the continuing resolution was needed. I think everyone in the Senate and certainly those who worked to put together the resolution which was adopted by the Senate fully understand it all, but the American people, who do not have access to the information that is available on a daily basis here, had to be confused by the procedures and what the issues were. One of the issues that can also be dealt with today is whether or not the bill that has been passed by Congress to fund the Department of Defense for the next fiscal year can be signed by the President so that not only can people who work for the Department of Defense be secure in the knowledge that they are going to be paid under the terms of not only employment arrangements but contracts, independent contractors, defense contractors, and the rest, but that we will be keeping a commitment to the military so that they can make plans, they can use the funds that are coming to them under the regular fiscal year 1996 appropriations bill in a thoughtful way that does not actually end up costing money. What worries me is that the President is sending signals that he may veto this bill because he thinks it provides too much money for defense, more than he had requested in his budget submission. I will tell you a lot of things have changed in the world since the President submitted his budget to the Congress. For example, we are seeing negotiated right now among different factions in the former Yugoslavia an arrangement which the President says may require additional United States forces, activities under our NATO alliance on the part of United States defense forces that will require more money than had been anticipated when this budget was submitted. One of the provisions in the Defense appropriations bill which our committee approved was a contingency appropriation of $643 million which is made available to the administration, to the Commander in Chief for use by the Department of Defense for contingency operations that had not been anticipated when that budget had been submitted. If this bill is not signed, there will be prolonged negotiations among the committees of the Congress with jurisdiction over defense matters. We do not know what the next bill will provide. We do not know how much will be provided or denied for contingency operations. There is a great deal of controversy right now, and the President surely knows this, in the Congress over whether we ought to support and fund and provide the resources for a massive ground force in the former Yugoslavia as a part of any peacekeeping operation. So I am suggesting that is an issue which can be certainly dealt with in a way that ought to be pleasing to the administration and favorable to the administration's interests, if this Defense appropriations bill is signed. The President has stated in numerous public addresses his commitment to a strong national defense. As a matter of fact, in his second State of the Union Address on January 25, 1994, President Clinton said: The budget I send to Congress draws the line against further defense cuts. It protects the readiness and quality of our forces. Ultimately, the best strategy is to do just that. I hope Congress without regard to party will support that position. I suggest that this Defense appropriations bill does support that position. There are some in Congress and in the administration who are going to argue that the President should veto the bill because it exceeds his budget request, but there are things that have come to light in terms of threats against the security of our country, particularly the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the capabilities that some countries have now of sending such weapons over long distances with new missile technologies that are beginning to develop around the world. These are in countries that are historically not our most serious security threats, but have become so or are capable of becoming so through these emerging technologies and the ability to acquire technologies from countries willing to sell these weapons and sell these new technologies. So, provided in this Defense appropriations bill are some additional funds to help meet these new threats, and it seems to me that this is a matter of grave national concern. I hope that the President will sign the bill, not only because it takes the Department of Defense out from under the continuing resolution which we just adopted last night, but because it goes a long way toward meeting the challenge that the President himself laid before the Congress in his last State of the Union Address and the address in 1994. I hope we can resolve these issues as they develop. There are other bills that are contentious as well. The Senator from Vermont mentioned a couple of them. The distinguished leader mentioned the Labor-HHS appropriations bill, which has not yet been brought to the floor of the Senate because the Democrats have been objecting and insisting on debating at length the motion to proceed to consider the bill. We hope that bill can be passed and the President will sign it as well. Mr. President, seeing no other Senator seeking recognition, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, the resolution provides that the Senate adjourn today until Monday, November 27 or 1 hour after the House votes, if they amend or defeat the continuing resolution that the Senate passed last night.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, at the request of the majority leader and with the understanding that it has been cleared on both sides of the aisle, I send the adjournment resolution to the desk and ask that it be considered.