Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I said on January 3 that I intended to savor every one of the next 17 days. And I am happy to report that I did. It was a great honor to serve as Majority Leader of the United States Senate--however briefly. At noon on Saturday, I handed that title back to my friend, Senator Lott. Today, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I want to tell Senator Lott that, if he ever needs to take a day off--for whatever reason-- I'll be happy to pinch hit for him. I learned a few things about the Senate these past two and a half weeks that I had not known before. One of my favorite bits of new knowledge has to do with a former member of this Senate, David Rice Atchison, of Missouri. Senator Atchison was president pro tem of the Senate in 1849. Back then, new Presidents were sworn in on March 4, not January 20. But, in 1849, March 4 fell on a Sunday. And the new President-elect, Zachary Taylor, didn't think it was appropriate to conduct official business on the Sabbath. So he chose to wait until the next day to take oath of office. Back then, the President pro tem was third in the line of presidential succession, not fourth. So, from noon on Sunday, March 4, when President Polk's term ended-- until noon on Monday, March 5--when President Taylor was sworn in-- Senator Atchison was President. Or so he and his friends claimed. Today, we know that President Taylor automatically became President as soon as President Polk stepped down. But for the rest of his life, Senator Atchison loved to say that he had been ``President for a day''--and that his presidency was the ``honest-est administration this country ever had.'' I do not know that Senate Democrats' brief time in the majority will make as interesting an historical footnote as the Atchison presidency. But I do believe the Senate accomplished some things during these last 17 days that bode well for this Congress. I particularly want to thank Senator Lott for the fairness he showed in agreeing to a distribution of responsibility that accurately reflects the composition of this first-ever 50-50 Senate. I also thank my fellow Democrats--particularly those who chaired committees. On Saturday, after a week of fair and thorough hearings, we confirmed the first seven of President Bush's cabinet officers. On Saturday, too, we saw, once again, one of the great miracles of American democracy: the peaceful transfer of power from one President to the next. I was moved by much of what President Bush said in his inaugural address, especially his conviction that there is no such thing as an ``insignificant'' person. I also believe there is no such thing as an insoluble problem. My colleagues and I are ready and willing to work with President Bush and Vice President Cheney, and with our Republican colleagues in Congress, to move America forward. Tomorrow, we understand the President will send us his ideas on education. We are anxious to see them. We will give them, and all of the President's proposals, careful and respectful consideration. We want to make this 50/50 Senate something to be proud of. Today, we are introducing our first proposals--our first priorities-- for this Congress. Many of them will sound familiar. That is because we have been working to pass them for a good long while. They are things like: a real, enforceable Patients' Bill of Rights; a reliable, affordable Medicare prescription drug benefit; middle-class tax cuts, and help for our children's schools. They all lead our list of priorities--for two reasons. First, and most important, because the American people have made it clear, these are their top priorities. Second: Because bipartisan majorities in Congress support them. The challenges we address affect all Americans, but they effect rural Americans in ways that are often different and more pressing. That is why I am also developing a separate package of bills called ``South Dakota First.'' But it won't help just my State. Instead, it will help people in small towns and rural communities throughout America. As we move ahead, we cannot leave rural America behind. Over the past several years, relations between our parties have become increasingly strained. By starting with the issues on which most of us do agree, we can strengthen our bonds of trust. And that will make it easier for us to solve the next challenges. Under President Clinton, we experienced the longest, strongest economic expansion in our Nation's history. We went from the biggest deficits ever, to the biggest surpluses ever. The question now is: What should we do with that surplus? One of our top priorities this year will be to deliver tax relief to hard-working families across the country. The debate over how we structure that tax cut is likely to be the most consequential debate we have all year. Our ability to achieve a strong, bipartisan compromise on taxes will be the biggest test of our 50-50 Senate. I am confident we can pass that test. We are willing to negotiate. At the same time, we are committed to two fundamental principles: First: The bulk of the tax relief must go to middle-class working families because they are the people who need tax relief most. Second, any tax cut must be affordable and fiscally responsible. The efforts we have made to restore fiscal discipline these last 8 years have resulted in lower interest rates, record-high job creation, and record-low unemployment. We must protect those gains. We cannot squander them by going back to the old days of deficit spending. President Bush has indicated that he will be sending us his recommendations for cutting taxes in late February. We look forward to working with him, and with out Republican friends, to pass a fair, fiscally responsible tax cut this year. Today, we are taking our first step. We are introducing a package of targeted tax cuts to help working families at the key junctures in their lives. Our tax cuts will help families pay for college; save for retirement; care for disabled and elderly family members; and pay for long-term care. We want to eliminate the marriage-penalty tax and eliminate the estate tax on more than 99 percent of estates--to help keep small businesses and family farms in families. We also want to expand the earned income tax credit for low-income working parents so they do not have to raise their children in poverty. And, we want to significantly expand child care tax credits for middle-class families; and extend them, for the first time, to stay-at- home parents of infants. Next, we must pass a real, enforceable Patients' Bill of Rights this year. The Norwood-Dingell Patients' Bill of Rights passed the House more than a year ago with strong bipartisan support. In the Senate, it was supported by every Democrat, and four Republicans. The bill we offer today mirrors it. It guarantees that you can go to an emergency room when you need to. It gives women direct access to OB-GYNs. It guarantees parents the right to choose a pediatrician for their children, and a pediatric specialist if they need one. It guarantees people the right to see qualified specialists when necessary, and to continue with the same doctor if they are pregnant or being treated for a serious illness. It guarantees that you will get the medicines your doctor says you need. It prohibits HMOs and insurance companies from gagging doctors to prevent them from telling patients all of their treatment options. It also prohibits them from providing doctors and hospitals with financial incentives for denying needed care. Finally, our bill holds insurers accountable. It gives patients the right to appeal denials of care to an independent board. If an insurer ignores the board, and its denial or delay of care results in serious injury or death, our bill allows victims to seek justice in a State court. Employers that provide health coverage cannot be sued under our plan unless they make the actual medical decisions that result in injury or death. Every week we delay, 350,000 Americans are denied needed health care--health care for which they have already paid. It is time for those delays to end. It is time to pass a real Patients' Bill of Rights. Next, we propose an affordable, voluntary Medicare prescription drug benefit. We all know the terrible financial--and emotional--strain paying for prescription drugs places on many older Americans and their families. Prescription drugs are an essential part of modern medicine. They ought to be part of Medicare, too. Our plan is universal. Every Medicare beneficiary is eligible, whether they are in traditional Medicare or Medicare+Choice. Our plan is voluntary. If you already have private prescription coverage you like, you can keep it. It is up to you. Our plan is affordable, and comprehensive. There is a $250 deductible, no caps on benefits and no gaps in coverage. The most anyone would pay out-of-pocket is $4,000 a year. It is absolutely wrong that seniors pay, on average, twice as much as HMOs and big insurance companies for the exact same medications. By combining the purchasing power of 40 million Medicare recipients, our plan gives seniors real bargaining power--so they will not have to pay the highest prices at the drugstore anymore. We are not talking about Government-run medicine. Medicare will contract with private companies to offer the prescription benefit. Seniors will be able to choose the company they like best, and they will be guaranteed convenient access to local pharmacies, whether they live in big cities or small rural communities. Next: Someone once said that education is the soul of a generation as it passes from one generation to the next. We need to work together to ensure the next generation of Americans learns the skills and knowledge necessary to be good parents, good workers, and good citizens. The quality of our future will be determined by the quality of our schools. It is as simple as that. We agree with President Bush: No child should be left behind. Every child deserves the chance to go to a good public school. The education bill we are introducing today gives more to local schools and asks more of schools. It includes incentives for States to set higher standards for everyone--students, teachers, and administrators--because the stakes are higher. But it lets local communities decide the best way to meet those standards. Our plan gives parents more information about how their children's schools are performing--and more of a say in how those schools are run. It also gives parents more choices about the public schools their children attend. Our bill targets special attention and help to struggling schools. At the same time, if a school cannot or will not fix its chronic problems, our plan contains real consequences. We will not allow children to be trapped in chronically failing schools. Much of what we are proposing won bipartisan support in Congress last year. Our bill reduces class sizes by keeping our commitment to help communities hire 100,000 qualified new teachers. It helps communities recruit good new teachers and principals, and it ensures that teachers, and principals, have the opportunity to update their skills and knowledge. Our plan includes grants to help schools repair leaking roofs and burst pipes and other urgent safety hazards, and reduced-rate bonds that will enable communities to cut the costs of new school construction by up to 50 percent. It also includes assistance to make sure that all schools have up-to- date technology and all teachers know how to use technology so all of our children are ready for the new economy. In addition, we propose to expand Head Start, so more children can start school ready to learn; and provide more and better child care, and before- and after-school programs, so children have a safe place to go when parents are at work. Our plan expands the Reading Excellence Act, to make sure every child can read by the end of the third grade. And it puts us on track to fund the Federal Government's full share for IDEA, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, to help students with disabilities develop to their fullest potential. In addition, our plan makes college more affordable for more families by increasing Pell grants and extending college tuition tax credits. And it strengthens training and other lifelong learning programs so workers can learn new skills and move into better-paying jobs. In the long run, investing in education is the surest way to increase a family's financial security. But, as someone once pointed out, people don't eat in the long run. They eat every day. It has been more than four years since the last time we raised the minimum wage. Inflation has since wiped out that entire increase. Too many low-income parents who work full time don't earn enough to feed their families and pay for other basic necessities. Two years ago, we introduced a bill to raise the minimum wage $1 an hour. This year, we are proposing a $1.50 an hour over 25 months--to make up for Congress's inaction. We need to raise the minimum wage. This year--no more delays. We also need to close the wage gap between men and women. It has been 38 years since President Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act. And American women still earn only 77 cents for every dollar men earn for doing the same work. This wage gap costs America's families $200 billion a year, more than $4,000 for each working woman's family. It is time to close it once and for all by better enforcing the law, and giving victims of wage discrimination new options for fighting it. We are also proposing new ways to help parents balance family and work without sacrificing part of their income. For instance, our bill expands the Family and Medical Leave Act to cover more work places, to fund workplace demonstration projects to provide paid family leave, and allow parents to use the leave to attend parent-teacher conferences and other important school functions. We also give States and communities more resources to develop more and better child care opportunities for working families. One necessity that too many low-income working families try to get by without is health insurance. Two years ago, we created the Children's Health Insurance Program to help low-income parents obtain health insurance for their children. Today, we are proposing to expand the CHIP program to include parents of eligible children, and to give States the option of expanding coverage to 19- and 20-year olds, and to legal immigrant women and children. These are important first steps. But we will be offering additional ideas in coming months to make sure more Americans have access to good, affordable health coverage. We also intend to offer ideas for strengthening our Nation's unemployment insurance system. We expect those proposals to look much like the reforms suggested last year by a blue ribbon commission made up of business, workers and Government representatives. It is not just low-income families; nearly every American family relies on Social Security and Medicare for economic security. We have a responsibility to make sure Social Security and Medicare are always there not just for the current generation of retirees, but for every generation. When Bill Clinton was first elected President, Medicare was expected to run out of money in 1999. But we didn't let that happen. Instead, we extended the life of the Medicare trust fund to 2025. And we improved Medicare coverage by adding important new preventive benefits. We also extended the solvency of the Social Security trust fund to 2034. This year, we are proposing to further protect both programs by taking both Medicare and Social Security off budget; putting the surpluses from both programs in a real lockbox, and making it harder to use the money in the lockbox for anything other than Social Security or Medicare. This administration, and this Congress, must work together to modernize Social Security and Medicare so they will be there for the baby boomers and beyond. Locking away the surpluses now must be the first step. People ought to be able to feel secure in their retirement. They also ought to be able to feel safe and secure in their own homes and communities. In the last several years, we have seen major crime go down in almost all categories. We need to keep those trends moving in the right direction. We know community policing works. We are proposing to help communities hire more community police and prosecutors as a result of that knowledge. We also know that kids and convicted criminals have no business possessing guns. So we are proposing to extend Project Exile and other successful efforts to reduce gun violence. We are also proposing to pass the Juvenile Brady bill to make sure that juveniles who commit serious drug or violent crimes are not allowed to possess guns ever, and close the gun show loophole--once and for all. We want to strengthen the Violence Against Women Act, including increased support for shelters. We want tougher punishments for criminals who prey on seniors. We want to expand drug courts and drug treatment. We want to expand delinquency prevention programs, so kids who are at risk, or who have already had scrapes with the law, can turn their lives around. In addition--and this is very important--we want to ensure that crime victims are treated with fairness and respect. We are proposing that crime victims be notified about court proceedings involving their case, and have an opportunity to have their opinions heard on these matters. These things are just basic decency. They ought to be basic rights as well. There is another right every American deserves--the right to vote, and to have his or her vote count--that is a right that should never be compromised. And we believe that there are times when it is compromised. Then our entire system of Government is jeopardized. We have just come through the most difficult Presidential elections in our lifetimes. We are seeing the peaceful transition of power to a new administration. Now, we need to make sure we never see another election like this last one. We are proposing that Congress create a blue ribbon commission on election reforms. Do all Americans have equal access to vote? If not, what should the Federal Government do to help? We need to hear from experts on these and other matters. We are also proposing a grant program to help states and communities update antiquated voting equipment. No American should be forced to overcome unreasonable obstacles to vote. In my mind, that is doubly true for members of our armed services. So, as part of our election reform package, we want to make it absolutely clear that military personnel retain their rights to vote at home--even when they are stationed abroad. This is not a change. This is the law now. We need to make sure everybody knows it. Also, before the next election, we must pass real campaign finance reform. The average winning Senator spent $6.4 million in the last election, 530 percent more than in 1980. In all, candidates and political parties spent more than $3 billion on Federal elections in 2000. An additional $400 million was spent on ``issue ads'' to try to influence races. More and more, special-interest money influences who runs for office, who wins, and what they do and don't do once they get here. We can--and must--change that. We are offering a plan based on the bipartisan Shays-Meehan plan that passed the House last year and won 52 votes in the Senate. Our plan is fair. It does not place one party or another at an advantage. It treats incumbents and challengers in both parties fairly. Most importantly, our plan is comprehensive. It bans unregulated ``soft money'' to political parties--the biggest loophole in the current system. It also prevents soft money from being rechanneled to outside groups for phony ``issue ads.'' We know Senators McCain and Feingold are also committed to passing campaign finance reform. We look forward to working with them to pass a workable, comprehensive plan this year. For many Americans, these past 8 years have been a time of unprecedented prosperity. But that is not true for most rural Americans. There is a quiet depression in many rural communities in South Dakota and throughout our Nation. Many small producers are being forced to sell farms and ranches that have been in their families for generations. Others are barely holding on. As small farms disappear, so do the small towns and businesses that depend on them. Sixty-five percent of the counties in my State lost population last year. Since 1996, farm income has dropped more than 20 percent. If you take away Government payments, it is down more than 40 percent. It is expected to drop another 10 percent this year. We don't need another year to know that the Freedom to Farm has not worked, and will not work. We must enact a new farm bill this year to restore the agriculture safety net. In addition, we must ensure fair competition for family farmers and ranchers at home and abroad, by prohibiting agribusiness giants from participating in anti-competitive practices that harm family farmers and rural communities; and by making agriculture a top trading priority. We must also continue to invest in ethanol. And we must strengthen America's commitment to food safety. Family farms don't just produce commodities. They produce communities. We can't afford to lose them. Finally, we must take new steps to protect the basic civil rights of all Americans, because we agree with President Bush that civil rights enforcement is critical to assuring that all Americans have equal access to schools, workplaces, and the courts. We are proposing a modest and necessary increase in funding for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and other Federal agencies charged with enforcing our nation's civil rights laws, and for the Legal Services Commission. In addition, we seek to end racial and other types of unreasonable and unconstitutional ``profiling''--whenever and wherever it occurs. As a first step toward that goal, we are directing the Attorney General to analyze the investigatory practices of all Federal law enforcement agencies. If there is evidence of Federal law enforcement agencies using racial, ethnic, or gender profiling, we want to find it. We want to know what should be done about it. We need to know. Beyond that, we propose to expand Federal hate crime laws to include gender, sexual orientation and disability and provide greater protections against crimes motivated by racial or religious bias. Our bill also prohibits employers from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. Last year, 57 Senators, including 13 Republicans, voted for our hate crimes bill. In the House, 232 members, 41 of them Republican, voted for it. Some people think of it as ``the Matthew Shephard bill'' or ``the James Byrd'' bill. We think of it as a matter of basic civil rights. Finally, in addition to preventing people from using old stereotypes as a basis for discrimination, we must also prevent people from using new technologies to discriminate. Our bill prohibits both employers and health insurers from using genetic test results as a basis for discrimination. It also prevents disclosure of genetic information to health insurers, data banks, employers, and anyone else who has no legitimate need for the information. We need to make sure that the new knowledge scientists are learning through the Human Genome Project--research funded largely by American taxpayers--is used to help America's families, not hurt them. In closing, Mr. President, 169 years ago this month the French political and social observer, Alexis De Toqueville, visited the Senate in session. Afterward, he wrote that the 1832 Senate was ``composed of eloquent advocates, distinguished generals, wise magistrates, and statesmen of note, whose arguments would do honor to the most remarkable parliamentary debates of Europe.'' Honorable debate and compromise has been in rather short supply in the Senate these last few years. Its absence has prevented us from doing many things we ought to do. The power has been transferred now to a new Congress, and a new Administration. Let's use that power to move America forward, together. Like ``President-for-a-day'' David Rice Atchison we are already assured a footnote in the history books simply by being members of the first 50/50 Senate. As we begin the work of this Congress, let us resolve that we will be more than a footnote. Let us agree that we will work together to write a new chapter of progress for the American people. I thank my fellow Democratic Senators--as well as some of our Republican friends--for helping to shape our first leadership bills of the 107th Congress. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I rise today to say goodbye to those young men and women who served in the United States Senate as pages during the fall of 2000. When they arrived in Washington in September, no one would have guessed that their term as a Senate page would be at such a historical time in the history of the United States. These dedicated young people were eyewitnesses to a presidential election which remained undecided for weeks after the votes were cast. In addition, they saw the Senate become an evenly divided body for the first time in decades. As I have mentioned on numerous occasions when saluting the young people who serve as Senate pages, the life of a page is quite challenging. The school day begins at 6 a.m. After classes, the pages report to work at the U.S. Senate. When the Senate convenes, the pages are at their post and ready for the day's activities. Pages are called upon to assist Senators and staff in the daily operations of the Senate. Their tasks include providing Senators with copies of the appropriate bills and resolutions under consideration. They may be asked to secure documents from a Senator's office and rush over to the Senate floor for that Senator's use in debate on an issue. During rollcall votes, pages are often asked to notify relevant staff of the arrival of Senators to the floor. Throughout the day, the page is called upon to perform any number of duties vital to the smooth operation of the Senate. They do so with a smile. This group of young men and women have had an extraordinary opportunity to serve as a Senate page. They are among a very select group to do so, and they did a great job. It is my hope that their experience here has served them well as they return home. Public service is an admirable profession. These young people are our public servants and leaders of tomorrow. Perhaps in the not too distant future, some of these young pages will return to Washington to serve as a Congressman or a Senator, or perhaps even as President of the United States. I know all of my colleagues join me in wishing the pages well and good luck as they continue with their education, and I hope that they now have a greater understanding of our Government and its importance to all the people of the United States. Mr. President, at this time, I ask unanimous consent that the names of those young people who served as fall pages be printed in the Record.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I said on January 3 that I intended to savor every one of the next 17 days. And I am pleased to tell you, I did. In fact, I called my office this morning just to hear the receptionist say--one last time--``Majority Leader's Office.'' I did it again this morning. It was an honor to serve as majority leader of this Senate--even if only for 17 days. In the spirit of bipartisanship, I want to say to my friend, Senator Lott that if he every needs to take a day off--for any reason--I'll be happy to fill in for him. I also want to thank my fellow Democratic Senators--particularly our committee chairs. It's been a while since a Democratic Senator had banged a chairman's gavel around here. But you never would have known it to see them in action. One measure of their dedication is the fact that we are here today to confirm the first seven of President Bush's Cabinet nominees. Every other Cabinet nominee has gotten, or is getting, a fair hearing. Something else happened during these last 17 days: We reached a historic agreement to share responsibility in America's first-ever 50/ 50 Senate. I want to thank Senator Lott again, and commend him for having the faith and the courage to do the right and fair thing. Today, I hand the title of Majority Leader back to him. And that's just fine. As Thomas Jefferson said: ``I like the dream of the future better than the history of the past.'' Today, as President Bush begins his Presidency, we wish him well. We want to work with him to make a better future--for all Americans. To the cynics who say that's not possible, let me point out seven reasons for hope: Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul O'Neill, Don Evans, Spence Abraham, Ann Veneman, and Rod Paige. I'd like to say a few words about each of these extraordinary men and women. Colin Powell: I told Colin Powell earlier this week that he has lots of admirers on both sides of the aisle here, and I consider myself one of the biggest. America is fortunate to have him as our ambassador to the world. General Powell has spent his entire adult life serving this nation. He started in the Army as a second lieutenant in June 1958 and spent the next 35 years as a professional soldier. He eventually rose to become Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff--the highest military assignment at the Pentagon--and National Security Adviser to President Reagan. He received many awards, including: the Defense Distinguished Service Medal with 3 oak leaf clusters, the Army Distinguished Service Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster, the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit with Oak Leaf Cluster, the Soldier's Medal, the Bronze Star, and the Purple Heart. In 1993, General Powell retired from the Army and found a new way to serve his country: as chairman of America's Promise--The Alliance for Youth. The world has changed dramatically since Colin Powell first put on an Army uniform. I was reminded of that again a few days ago when I read a newspaper article about police officer in Sioux Falls by the name of Greg Schmit. Officer Schmit and 10 other police officers throughout America recently returned from Russia. They went to Russia as part of a State Department program to train Russian police in Western policing methods. They didn't go out of some misguided idealism. They went because it is in America's national security interest to help foster the rule of law and a professional police force in Russia. I mention this because I believe there are parallels between what Officer Schmit and his colleagues did, and what Secretary Powell can, and must, do as Secretary of State. The threats to world peace are different today than when Colin Powell first joined the Army--but they are no less dangerous. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction has turned what used to be regional conflicts into potential global catastrophes. New technologies and more open societies have enabled drug traffickers and other criminals to expand their activities--threatening American citizens and democratic advances worldwide. Abandoning our responsibilities as a world leader will not protect us from the threats in today's world. But it would deprive us of the benefits. We must not fall for the false security of isolationism. We must remain engaged in the world. Protecting America's interests and promoting the causes of peace and democracy throughout the world will require a team effort. I can think of no one better-suited to head that team than Colin Powell. Donald Rumsfeld: Joining Secretary Powell on that team is an outstanding leader who has also had a long and distinguished career inside and outside of government: Donald Rumsfeld. As Secretary of Defense, Don Rumsfeld will lead 1.5 million active duty personnel, nearly 1 million reserve personnel and more than 800,000 full-time civilian employees. And he will encounter new and unconventional threats that defy conventional solutions. Clearly, these are daunting challenges. But Don Rumsfeld is well- qualified to meet them. A graduate of Princeton University, he served three years as a U.S. Navy aviator before being elected in 1962--at the age of 30--to the House of Representatives. In 1969, he resigned from Congress to work for President Nixon, and stayed to work for President Ford. In 1975 he was confirmed by the Senate to serve as our 13th and youngest Secretary of Defense. Two years later, he began a 20-year career in the private sector. But he continued to answer the call of public duty, serving as President Reagan's Special Envoy for the Middle East and chairman of the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States. I look forward to working with both Secretary Powell and Secretary Rumsfeld. There are five areas in particular where I hope we can build bipartisan support: First: In recent years, the U.S. has worked with NATO to end ethnic cleansing in the former Yugoslavia and restore stability to southeastern Europe. In East Asia, we worked with our Korean and Japanese allies to diminish North Korea's nuclear threat and come within striking distance of an agreement to halt that country's missile program. We must not threaten these and other critical alliances by rushing to disengage from successful efforts in the Balkans and elsewhere. Second: We must also avoid threatening our friends--and our enemies-- unnecessarily by rushing too quickly to deploy a national missile defense. President Bush has said he is committed to deploying such a system, and Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld also have expressed support for it. Let me be clear: Democrats also support ballistic missile defense system--as long as it meets four essential criteria. It must be affordable and effective, it must meet the threat, and it must not damage relations with our allies. In short, it must make us more secure, not less. Third: We want to work with Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld, and with President Bush, to build bipartisan support for the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. I will not dwell here on the lengths to which CTBT opponents went in the last Congress to tilt the playing field--both procedurally and substantively. Suffice it to say that this important treaty did not get the fair and full hearing it should have, and the Senate failed to ratify it. General John Shalikashvili, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said recently: ``(t)he advantages of the Test Ban Treaty outweigh any disadvantages, and thus . . . ratification would increase national security.'' I hope the Bush administration will pay close attention. Fourth: We must maintain our support for efforts to control the spread of weapons of mass destruction, such as the Cooperative Threat Reduction program--better known as ``the Nunn-Lugar program.'' This program enables us to work with Russia to reduce its nuclear arsenal. It has led to the destruction of thousands of Russian nuclear weapons and weapons platforms. It has also resulted in tighter security at Russian nuclear weapons development and production facilities. It is hard to imagine a better investment in our national security. We must maintain it. Fifth: Our diplomatic corps will always be our first line of defense. We must make sure it has the resources it needs to do its job well. At the same time, we must make it clear to our friends and our enemies alike that, if America's values and interests are threatened, and if diplomacy fails, we will use force. We must maintain America's role as a global leader. Paul O'Neill: To do that, we must maintain our fiscal discipline. Paul O'Neill, our next Secretary of the Treasury, understands that. Like Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld, he comes to his post with a long and impressive record of achievement in both the private and public sectors. He has been a tremendously successful CEO of a major American corporation, Alcoa, which operates worldwide and has thrived in the global economy under his leadership. He has earned the respect of Wall Street--and Alcoa employees. George Becker is president of the Steelworkers Union. Listen to what he had to say about Paul O'Neill--quote: ``Most of our relationships with employers are confrontational by nature. but we found that Paul had very keen interest on the side of working people.'' His predecessors in the current Administration--Lloyd Bentsen, Bob Rubin, and Larry Summers--played critical roles in restoring the fiscal strength of the United States and in responding to financial crises around the globe. As a result--in significant measure--of their insight and actions, the new Treasury Secretary will inherit a remarkably strong fiscal situation. In his new office, I hope Secretary O'Neill will remember how hobbled our economy was a decade ago, and how hard Americans worked to put our economy back on sound financial footing. I also hope he will look to the future. In less than a decade, the first Baby Boomers will retire. We want to work with Secretary O'Neill, President Bush, and our Republican colleagues to prepare for the Baby Boomers' retirement now, while we still have the time, so we can avoid a crisis down the road. We can afford to cut taxes. We can afford to provide to add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare. But we must not go too far. We cannot afford to return to fiscal irresponsibility and weakness. There's a better way. Together, we can find it. Don Evans: Maintaining fiscal discipline is the key to keeping our economy strong. We must also continue to help American businesses and entrepreneurs grow and create new jobs, and continue to seek out new markets for American good and services--at home and abroad. That will be the job of President Bush's new Commerce Secretary. And he is well-prepared to take it on. Mr. Evans understands that we live in a global economy, and that erecting trade barriers between countries is the wrong approach. As someone from a rural state, I particularly appreciate his commitment to promote access to the newest technologies in rural America. We are ready to work with Secretary Evans on all of these priorities. We also want to work with him to keep politics out of the census, so that we can get an accurate count of America's population. Spencer Abraham: These last couple of weeks have provided dramatic reminders of how essential affordable, reliable energy supplies are to our nation. In California, rolling energy blackouts have forced temporary shutdowns of Silicon Valley computer giants, and turned off traffic lights at the height of rush-hour. In South Dakota and many other states, soaring oil and natural gas prices are making it harder for families to heat their homes, and eating into business profits. As Secretary of Energy, Spence Abraham is the person to whom America will look for solutions to our nation's pressing energy needs. He is also the person most responsible for ensuring the safety and security of our nation's nuclear stockpile, storing and cleaning up nuclear waste, and overseeing critical research at our national energy labs. I am confident that Secretary Abraham is ready for these difficult tasks. He showed during his six years in the Senate that he is willing to work in a bipartisan fashion. I look forward to continuing to work with him in his new capacity. I am especially interested in working with him to promote the use of renewable energy sources such as wind and ethanol, and providing incentives for improved energy efficiency. By using our resources wisely, we can reduce our dependence on foreign oil and ensure the stability of our economy. Ann Veneman: The Department of Agriculture is charge with the oversight of a wide range of policy areas--from commodity programs and trade to food safety, from natural resources and forestry management to nutrition programs. I am confident that Ann Veneman has the breadth of experience and knowledge to ensure Americans are very well served in all of these areas. Ms. Veneman has a long history of public service. In 1991, Agriculture Secretary Madigan tapped her to be Deputy Secretary at USDA. She was the first women ever to be appointed to that position. But what people know her for was her significant contributions to the GATT Uruguay round negotiations on agriculture, from which we continue to benefit. In 1995, Governor Wilson appointed her to be Secretary of Agriculture in California. She was the first woman to serve as Agriculture Secretary in California. While there, she pursued a strong and varied agenda that included opening new markets for trade and making significant improvements in California's food safety system. With this nomination, Ms. Veneman will be the first woman United States Secretary of Agriculture. She brings considerable strengths to this post, and we are confident that we will take major strides in farm policy with her at the helm. Roderick Paige: Finally, I want to commend President Bus for choosing Dr. Roderick Paige as his Secretary of Education. As superintendent of the Houston Independent School District and before that, as a member of Houston's school board, Dr. Paige has shown that he believes every child deserves an opportunity to attend a good public school. During his nearly seven years as superintendent, Houston saw significant gains in the numbers of 10th graders passing Texas' basic skills test--especially among minority students. Dr. Paige understands from personal experience the many challenges facing America's public schools, the men and women who work in them, and the children who depend on them. He has earned the support and admiration of a wide variety of education professionals. He has earned this nomination. I look forward to working closely with him to help President Bush fulfill his pledge to leave no child behind. Again, I commend President Bush for sending us seven such strong nominees. I urge my colleagues to support all of them. And I look forward to working with each of them to make that dream of a better future, that Thomas Jefferson wrote about, a reality. nomination of colin powell

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. In addition to the provisions just discussed, the distinguished Republican leader and I have reached understandings on several related matters, which I believe he would like to describe.

Mr. DASCHLE. I will briefly describe the provisions of the resolution. First, it provides that the membership of Senate committees will be equally divided between the two parties, and that, consistent with a separate resolution passed on January 3, 2001, all committees will be chaired by Republican Senators beginning at noon on January 20. Second, the resolution provides that committee budgets and office space will be divided equally, subject to the customary set-asides for administrative expenses and so-called non-designated staff. It is our expectation that the details of those arrangements will be negotiated and agreed to by the respective chairman and ranking members of the committee, in consultation with other members of each committee. It will also be left to the committees, as is customary at the beginning of each new Congress, to agree to committee rules of procedure. Further, the resolution provides that committee administrative expenses may be increased where necessary, but that the total administrative expense allocation for all committees shall not exceed historic levels. I would add that my understanding of this provision is that it will result in little or no net increase in the total amounts spent by committees on administrative expenses. Third, it provides, in the case of a tie vote in committee on a bill or nomination, that either leader may move to discharge the committee, and that after 4 hours of debate, equally divided, the Senate proceed to vote on the motion to discharge. If the motion is agreed to, the bill or nomination would be placed on the calendar. Similarly, in the case of a tie vote in a subcommittee on a legislative item or nomination, the resolution authorizes the committee chairman to discharge the subcommittee and place the legislative item or nomination on the full committee agenda. Fourth, the resolution provides that no cloture motion shall be filed by either party except to bring to a close debate, and that in no case shall cloture be filed before the expiration of 12 hours of debate. Fifth, it stipulates that it shall continue to be considered the prerogative of the majority leader to make motions to proceed--although the resolution does not affect the existing right of every Senator to make a motion to proceed if he or she chooses to do so. Sixth, it provides that in scheduling and debating all legislative and executive business in the Senate, both leaders shall seek to attain an equal balance of the interests of the two parties. Finally, it provides that should either party attain a majority of the whole number of Senators during the 107th Congress, a new organizing resolution would be required. I would add that it is the expectation of the two leaders that if the ratio in the full Senate changes to 51-49, then a resolution instituting one-seat margins in all committees would be necessary. That summarizes the basic provisions of the resolution. Does the distinguished Republican leader wish to comment?

Mr. DASCHLE. The resolution just agreed to represents an honorable compromise between the two parties on how best to organize the Senate in the 107th Congress. It was agreed to only after extensive negotiations between the two leaders, and after thorough consultation with all Senators. Although there were difficult issues presented, and the two sides approached those issues from very different points of view, in the end we were able to reach an agreement that, we hope, will allow the Senate to take up and act on the Nation's business in a bipartisan manner. In the meantime, we both agree that this situation is new ground and some things may have been overlooked in the crafting of this resolution. I would therefore acknowledge that there may be an additional need to revisit this issue at a later date.

Mr. DASCHLE. I appreciate the remarks of the distinguished Republican leader. I also want to assure him that during the 17 days in which Democrats will hold the majority, we intend to operate in the most bipartisan manner possible. As I have said before, in a 50-50 Senate, bipartisanship is not just an option, it's a requirement. This resolution enables the Senate to get to work immediately on the Nation's business--including nomination hearings, some of which have already begun. I thank my friend the Republican leader, and all Members of the Senate, for their cooperation and good faith in allowing us to reach agreement on this important measure. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Will the Senator from Alaska seek recognition?

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I modify the unanimous consent request that I made in the following manner. I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be recognized in this order, and to the times allocated as I will suggest: Senator Byrd be recognized for 10 minutes, Senator Stevens be recognized for 5 minutes, Senator Gramm of Texas be recognized for 10 minutes, Senator Domenici be recognized for 10 minutes, Senator Roberts be recognized for 4 minutes, Senator Bennett be recognized for 5 minutes, and that Senator Reid of Nevada be recognized for 2 minutes; that at the end of the debate the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. DASCHLE. If I could just make a unanimous consent request? The Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, asked for 3 minutes. I ask unanimous consent he be recognized preceding the recognition of Senator Reid for 3 minutes.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the resolution we have at the desk, that no amendments or motions be in order to the resolution, and that the Senate vote without any intervening action or debate at 3:30 on adoption of the resolution.

Mr. DASCHLE. How much time would the Senator from New Mexico be interested in?

Mr. DASCHLE. How much time----

Mr. DASCHLE. I ask unanimous consent Senator Inhofe then be recognized, and Senator Carper be recognized after Senator Reid for 3 minutes.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, Senator Lott and I have been continuing in our discussions and negotiations throughout the day. We have reached an agreement, and we are now in a position to lay the resolution before the body. It is my intention to have a vote--as I understand it, there is no request for a rollcall vote--at 3:30 this afternoon. So I encourage those Senators who wish to participate in the debate, or to present their views, to come to the floor between now and 3:30. At that time, I will ask that the Senate vote on the organizing resolution. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. DASCHLE. I now, again, suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask the request be vitiated.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote occur at 3:30 and that it be a unanimous-consent request for a voice vote.

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. The other day, I quoted the writer Thomas Wolfe who said: America is not only the place where miracles happen, they happen all the time. If the resolution I will soon introduce is not miraculous, it is, at the very least, historic. It is also fair and reasonable. The details and the spirit of this agreement, which I expect the Senate to pass later today, should enable us to conduct our Nation's first 50/50 Senate in a most productive and bipartisan manner. I especially thank the Republican leader, Senator Lott. We will enter into a colloquy in a period of time to be later determined, but I must say, without his leadership and his sense of basic fairness, this agreement would not have come about. He and I have spent many hours over the last several months, and now weeks, and certainly in the last several days, negotiating the details of this agreement. He spent many more hours consulting with the members of his caucus about it. He and they deserve credit for taking this unprecedented step. I also thank and commend my colleagues on this side of the aisle for their good counsel and patience as this agreement was negotiated, and for their support of the finished product. I particularly thank our distinguished President pro tempore, Robert C. Byrd, for his advice. When you are making history, you can't have a better guide than the man who has literally written the book on the history of the Senate. Our negotiations involve many difficult issues and many strongly held opinions. Neither party got everything it wanted. Both sides made concessions. Both caucuses made principled compromises. That is the essence of democracy. This agreement accurately reflects the historic composition of the Senate. More important, I believe it reflects the political thinking of the American people. It calls for equal representation on Senate committees. Every committee would have the same number of Republicans and Democrats. And it specifies that Republicans will chair the committees after January 20. It allows for equal budgets and office space for both caucuses, at 50/50. One of the most vexing questions we struggled with during our negotiations was how to break ties when committees are divided equally. We have agreed that in the event of a tie vote, either leader can move to discharge a bill or nomination. The Senate will then debate the motion to discharge for four hours, and that time will be equally divided. There will then be a vote on the motion. If the motion passes, the bill or nomination would be placed on the calendar. Similarly, the resolution allows committee Chairs to discharge a subcommittee in the case of a tie vote and place the legislative item or nomination on the full committee agenda. We arrived at this process after much thinking and exchange of ideas. Senator Lott has been concerned that equal representation on the committees could lead to gridlock. While I do not share that concern, I believe this was a fair concession to get this agreement. As to cloture, the resolution provides that no cloture resolution shall be filed by either party except to end a debate, and in no case would cloture be filed before at least 12 hours of debate. This provision reflects concerns on our side of the aisle. We wanted to ensure that there would be an opportunity for debate before cloture was filed. Here, too, I believe Senator Lott and the Republicans have provided a fair compromise. The resolution provides that the majority leader shall retain his prerogative to obtain first right of recognition but that both leaders may be recognized, as is currently the case, to make motions to proceed; and in scheduling legislation on the floor, both leaders shall attempt to attain an equal balance of the interests of either of the two parties; and if either party achieves a true majority during the 107th Congress, we would need to adopt a new organizing resolution. Senator Lott and I have discussed other ways to ensure bipartisanship in the Senate, from the right to offer amendments to the makeup of conference committees. We have pledged to work together to make the Senate operate in a fair and bipartisan manner, which I hope will enable us to demonstrate to the American people that their system of government is strong and sound. I have been asked what bipartisanship will mean in the 107th Congress. We cannot quantify bipartisanship. Bipartisanship is not a mathematical formula; it is a spirit. It is a way of working together that tolerates open debate. It recognizes principled compromise--such as today's historic agreement. Bipartisanship means respecting the right of each Senator to speak his or her mind and vote his or her conscience. It means recognizing that we must do business differently after an election that gave us a 50/50 Senate and almost an evenly divided House. Above all, it means putting the national interests above personal or party interests. Tomorrow, Congress will count the electoral ballots and officially recognize the results of the Presidential election. It is fitting that today we officially recognize the results of the Senate elections which gave us an even split between the parties. Today's agreement makes a big downpayment on the bipartisanship we owe our country. Democrats and Republicans made significant concessions, putting the national interest first and putting party aside. It is my hope and my expectation we are witnessing only the beginning of a cooperative and productive 107th Congress. This certainly sets a mark. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the Senator from Idaho sought recognition first, and I will allow him to be recognized.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. That is correct. As all of our colleagues know--the distinguished Senator knows probably better than anybody on our side--this has been a matter that Senator Lott and I have been working on now for over 2 months. We have been in constant consultation with our colleagues on both sides, and with our more senior Members even more frequently. So this is a very important matter, and I hope people would treat it as such. It is critical we continue our work here so that we can organize the Senate, that we can appoint Members to appropriate committees, and that we can take the business of the committees as seriously as that business requires, given hearings and other issues that need to be resolved at an early date. So it is very important for us to conduct our business throughout the rest of the month. I appreciate very much the assistant majority leader's comments and questions in that regard. I now yield the floor.