Alfonse D’Amato

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 10, 1998, at 10:00 a.m. in room 226 of the Senate Dirksen Office Building to hold a hearing on ``The United States Marshals Service: A Selection Process for the 21st Century.''

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry be allowed to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 10, 1998, at 9 a.m. in SR-328A. The purpose of this meeting will be to examine the current Federal Crop Insurance Program and consider improvements to the system.

Mr. D'AMATO

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. What is the pending business?

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I believe we have reached a point where I am not aware of any other outstanding amendments. I think there may be two Senators who, for whatever reason, would object, apparently, to us calling for a vote. But it would be the intention, otherwise, of the leadership to dispose of this amendment by at least 5:45, is what I've been given to understand. I don't know what my colleagues might object to or what part of the bill they might want to debate. It would seem reasonable to me that if they do have objection, they should come to the floor and state it. Let's have a vote on it or an attempt to deal with whatever they feel is an inequity. We might lose, we might win, or they may get their way, or they may not. But the business of the people, I believe, would best be served by resolving this. I just have no idea at this time as to what their objections might be. So even if I were in a position to remedy the deficiencies--and I am not saying this is a perfect bill; it is far from perfect, and it could be second-guessed by many. But I am not in a position, nor is the ranking member or Senator Reed, who is standing in for Senator Sarbanes, at this point to even offer any type of solution or compromise if we are kept in the dark. Now, I don't see any useful purpose in that. So I ask that our respective sides reach out to our colleagues through their staffs to ascertain from them whether they can inform us as to what procedure they would recommend we undertake. If it is to stop the entire bill, then it would seem to me that the leadership should be advised so that they can proceed accordingly. Any Member has the right to lodge his or her objection and to take to the floor and, indeed, make their views known, offer their amendments, or prolong debate. I guess that is a nice way for saying ``enter into a filibuster.'' I respect that. I have, on occasion, resorted to that myself. Now, having said that, I came down to the floor and took the floor and raised my objection. So when we have reduced a bill to a point where all of the Senators, except one or two, have agreed that we should go forward, it seems to me that in fairness to the body we should have some kind of an explanation and set about a course of action to determine how we can deal with it. That would not be my prerogative; that would be the prerogative of the majority and minority leaders. They might decide to file for cloture, or they might decide to undertake another activity, or they might even be able, as I would think, to mediate successfully a cessation of the objections from our colleagues. But I want the Record to note that we have done as much as we can. We are here. We are ready. This bill is ready, and, as far as I am concerned and to the best I can determine, this amendment is ready to be acted on. Forty-one plus billion dollars would be spent over the next 5 years on a combination of activities--rural, urban, suburban, new starts, new buses, improvement of existing facilities, extension of some --a whole combination. Even at this eleventh-and-a-half hour, there are some very worthy amendments that we have taken dealing with the disabled and giving communities the ability to buy vehicles and put them in a capital program that they might not qualify for, giving additional flexibility to States to use some of these funds. So I think it is a well-balanced approach to transportation. I hope my colleagues will give us an opportunity to conduct the business of the people as it should. With that, Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, and maybe we can get our two colleagues to come down and resolve their differences.

Mr. D'AMATO. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. privilege of the floor

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, we have no objection and support the amendment.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. I have no objection. (The remarks of Mr. Wellstone pertaining to the submission of S. Con. Res. 82 are located in today's Record under ``Submission of concurrent and Senate Resolutions.'')

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. We are prepared to accept this amendment. It strikes a balance. It provides $250 million more for those rural communities that are at populations of under 50,000. It can be accomplished within the framework of the budget. We believe, as a result of the reconfiguration of the distribution of the $5 billion, that it will be done in such a way as to maximize the dollars that have been provided by the Budget Committee, the budget authority and the outlays, and that it will not do violence to the agreement. It reduces the new starts by $150 million from $2.5 billion to $2.35 billion. It reduces those dollars that would go to the discretionary bus program from $500 million to $400 million and then adds $250 million to the rural formula program, so that my colleagues who represent rural America will be producing, under this bill, $500 million--a half a billion dollars--over and above what the committee had initially reported out. Mr. President, I believe it is a good compromise, and I can be totally supportive of it. I urge my colleagues to support it.

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, we have maintained in this, as it relates to the construction of a ferry, the same worker protection language that heretofore has existed in mass transportation. I would like to call that to the attention of the Chair. I thank the Senator for his initiative in this most important opportunity to get people off of the welfare rolls and see to it that they do have access to the jobs that are increasingly growing in number in the suburbs. I ask I be added as a cosponsor.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, these additional funds will benefit transit operators of all sizes in both urban and rural areas, and in order to meet the new demands for bus and rail systems across the Nation, half the increase--$2.5 billion--will be spent only on new starts. The rural transit program will enjoy a $354 million increase over the amount authorized in the 1991 ISTEA bill. Over the last 15 years, transit funding has remained relatively flat while highway funding has soared. In 1982, the Federal Government spent $4 billion on mass transit and $9 billion on highways. In 1998, the Government will spend $4.8 billion on transit while spending has grown to $23 billion. Meanwhile, the demands for transit funding have grown exponentially. Communities in high-growth cities are facing problems of traffic congestion and poor air quality while older transit cities, such as New York and Chicago, need additional funds to maintain and improve transit service. With this increase in mass transit funding, we can now address many of these needs. More than 80 million Americans, almost one-third of the U.S. population, cannot drive or do not have access to a car. For these people, mass transit is usually the only means of transportation available. The Nation's 32 million senior citizens and 24 million people with disabilities require reliable, safe public transportation service to maintain their independence. According to the Federal Transit Administration's annual report, U.S. businesses would lose $15 billion a year because of highway traffic congestion if all U.S. transit commuters drove to work instead. More than half of all transit trips are work trips, and people who use transit come from every income level and demographic background. Federal transit programs benefit communities of all sizes across the Nation. Today, rural transit carries riders more than a billion miles every year. Rural areas have a higher percentage of elderly and disabled populations who are increasingly dependent on mass transit for basic transportation needs. Madam President, in closing, I thank the chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, Senator Chafee. Mr. Sarbanes has been a steadfast ally in these negotiations. And, once again, without the cooperation of my Budget Committee chairman, Senator Domenici, and the ranking member, Senator Lautenberg, we never would have come to this point. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a proposed summary of the amendment, for those Senators and staffs who wish to review the amendment.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I rise today to offer an amendment which will reauthorize the mass transit program under ISTEA. First of all, I thank my colleagues for the many months of negotiations and hard work necessary to produce this breakthrough agreement which has resulted in the amendment that we have offered. What I intend to do is just briefly give an outline and, hopefully, with the concurrence of the majority leader and other Members, we will take this matter up for fuller discussion and consideration tomorrow morning. But let me first thank the ranking member on the Banking Committee for his support during this very difficult time. Senator Sarbanes has been steadfast in his support and in his approach to working out a balanced transit package. Let me also thank the chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Domenici, for without him and his ability to see that the levels of increase can be accommodated in the budget, we would have no opportunity of going forward. Then, of course, there is my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from New York, Senator Moynihan, and his steadfastness in helping to achieve this balance. In total, our amendment will authorize $41.3 billion for mass transit over the next 3 years. That represents a 30-percent increase from the $31.5 billion authorized in the 1991 ISTEA bill. Our amendment provides for funding levels that are $12.6 billion over the administration's NEXTEA proposal. The amendment will also provide $5 billion more than the Banking Committee bill reported out by a 17-to-1 margin last September. We have been able to achieve this increase thanks to a bipartisan coalition of 24 Senators, including our present Presiding Officer. I thank the Senator from Texas for her graciousness and for her support, because I think it is a recognition of the growing needs of mass transit. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter to the majority and minority leaders which was signed by this bipartisan coalition requesting an increase in mass transit funding.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1173, the highway bill, with debate continuing on the pending transit amendment. It is hoped that the Senate will be able to make considerable progress on numerous amendments which have been offered and filed in regard to that legislation. Throughout Tuesday's session, as under the unanimous consent agreement, the Senate will recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. for the weekly policy luncheons. Members should anticipate a busy voting day with votes into the evening.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I also ask unanimous consent that from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m., the Senate stand in recess for the weekly policy luncheons to meet.

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, March 10; that immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted and the Senate resume consideration of amendment No. 1931, the pending transit amendment to S. 1173, the highway bill.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader, after consultation with the Democratic leader, may proceed to consideration of S. Con. Res. 78 relating to the indictment and prosecution of Saddam Hussein; that the only amendments in order be an amendment to the resolution and an amendment to the preamble to be offered by Senator Specter; that the total debate time on the resolution and preamble be limited to 2 hours equally divided between the chairman and ranking member, or their designees, with 10 minutes of the minority time allocated for Senator Dorgan. I further ask unanimous consent that following the expiration or yielding back of debate time and disposition of the Specter amendment, the Senate proceed to vote on the adoption of the resolution and that if the resolution is agreed to, then the amendment to the preamble be agreed to and the preamble, as amended, be considered agreed to.

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order. Thereupon, the Senate, at 6:17 p.m., adjourned until Tuesday, March 10, 1998, at 9:30 a.m. 

Mr. D'AMATO

Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I rise today in support of the Examination Parity and Year 2000 Readiness Act and I encourage the support of my colleagues in order to address the serious threat facing our nations' financial industry. While the new millennium brings with it the hopes and dreams of a new era, it is also accompanied by a significant threat to all Americans who use our technology dependent banking industry. The Congress must insure that our regulators are provided with the power and authority to protect the savings of all Americans. Mr. President, nearly every hard working American citizen uses a bank, savings and loan or credit union. Banks in particular represent a symbol of safety and trust where Americans feel confident about placing their savings and conducting financial transactions. The widely reported Year 2000 problem places that safety and trust at risk. For a variety of reasons, computer software systems and devices have traditionally used two characters to represent the year in date calculations. A typical scenario involves a system that arranges a date to perform a comparison or calculation. For example, comparing the year 2000 to the year 1998, could result in 1998 being identified greater than 2000. The potential fallout could range from a simple miscalculation of interest on savings accounts, to the complete loss of customer records, and possibly even jeopardizing the viability of an institution. These systems must be validated to insure that they will function properly after December 31, 1999. The Examination Parity and Year 2000 Readiness Act requires Federal financial regulatory agencies to conduct seminars on the implication of the Year 2000 problem and extends the same examination authority bank regulators already posses to thrift and credit union regulators. This legislation enjoys bipartisan Congressional support and has the endorsement of the executive branch. With the proper attention and focus of our federal regulators, the savings of American citizens can be protected and the safety and soundness of the American banking industry can be assured. Mr. President, I want to commend Senator Bennett, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Financial Services and Technology, for his tireless effort to help solve the problems our financial intermediaries will face because of the year 2000 problem. With his usual perseverance, he has demonstrated the important role Congress has in understanding the impact of technology on the financial system. I also commend Senator Dodd for cosponsoring the Senate bill. Of course, quick action on this measure by the House was made possible by Chairman Leach's recognition of the need for this legislation.