Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today it is my unhappy duty to note the continued imprisonment of Wei Jingsheng by the Government of China. In an attempt to silence his bold voice for democracy, Mr. Wei has been jailed in solitary confinement or forced to work in a labor camp for all but 6 months of the past 18 years. As a result of his mistreatment, he suffers from a life-threatening heart condition and cannot lift his head due to a neck injury. Today I join my colleagues to call for his immediate and unconditional release, and urge the Government of China to provide him with medical attention. Mr. Wei's commitment to democracy and freedom despite such mistreatment is a testament to the strength of the human spirit and the power that words hold over the human soul. He was first jailed in 1978 after founding an independent magazine and daring to call for democracy. Despite the hard conditions of prison life, Mr. Wei refused to abandon his beliefs. Over the next decade, he wrote many letters-- some to his family telling of his daily life, others to the leaders of his nation urging them to take immediate steps toward democracy. Virtually all were confiscated by prison authorities and never sent. Released as a result of international pressure in 1993, Mr. Wei immediately resumed his advocacy of democracy despite all that he had suffered. Within 6 months he was sentenced to another 14 years in prison. Today Chinese officials consider his writings so threatening that he is constantly monitored by criminal inmates whose job it is to ensure that he puts no words down on paper. Despite these measures, Mr. Wei's words have echoed throughout China and the world. In 1989, demands for his release helped to stir the demonstration in Tiananmen Square. He also has been honored with the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award, the Sakharov Prize for Freedom, and been nominated many times for the Nobel Prize for Peace. I am confident that the Chinese Government's attempts to silence Mr. Wei will not succeed. Mr. Wei's letters, which he reclaimed as a condition of his release in 1993, are published in ``The Courage To Stand Alone: Letters From Prison and Other Writings,'' to be released today. It is my hope that these words will continue to echo throughout the world, and help to bring freedom and democracy to the people of China. Thinking of Mr. Wei, I am reminded of the words of another man imprisoned for his uncompromising beliefs. As he wrote from his cell: Only one thing has remained: the chance to prove--to myself, to those around me and to God--that . . . I stand behind what I do, that I mean it seriously and that I can take the consequences. Today I will meet the writer of those words, President Vaclav Havel of the Czech Republic. I am filled with hope as I think of President Havel's extraordinary life and his path from political prisoner to president. I know that Mr. Wei shares President Havel's determination to stand behind his beliefs. It is my hope that one day he also will be free to travel to Washington and that this day will come soon. Mr. Wei's unjust imprisonment must end, and I appeal to the Government of China to release him immediately.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I appreciate very much the distinguished Senator from Alaska, and I will use my leader time. I want to talk to the amendment, as well. But I first want to express profound appreciation to the two managers of the bill. Senator Stevens and Senator Byrd have done an incredible job in dealing with the array of needs that the country has demonstrated and that we have brought to their attention. They have been remarkably responsive in addressing these needs, to the extent that our resources allow. I want to publicly praise both our leaders in this regard and thank them for their extraordinary response thus far. I also want to thank the staff director of the Committee on Appropriations, Mr. Steve Cortese, for his helpfulness and his willingness to consider the needs of States like mine that have been devastated by disasters. He has performed admirably in his new role, and we look forward to working with him in the future. I would also like to thank the Democratic staff director, Mr. Jim English, for his fine work in putting this package together. We can finish this bill easily this afternoon. I expect we can come to a conclusion with the remaining amendments. I only hope somehow even before we vote on final passage, we can come to some conclusion about this extraneous provision. I cannot agree more heartily with the Senator from South Dakota, my distinguished junior colleague, in his remarks about the repercussions that this amendment could have and the extraordinary divisiveness in what otherwise has been a remarkably bipartisan effort, with Senators on both sides of the aisle responding to a natural disaster in so many parts of the country, that has to be addressed by this legislation. This is not the place for this. There is a way with which all of us can assure that there will never be another Government shutdown. Those of us on this side of the aisle warned about Government shutdowns long ago and did as much as possible to prevent them when they occurred. We can commit our determination, we can commit our willingness in every way, legislatively and otherwise, to assure that there will not be a Government shutdown. We will do everything in our power to prevent another one. To hold this bill hostage to finding a mechanism to prevent one, to hold this bill hostage and tell all the people who are waiting, as we speak, for assistance, that that cannot happen until we resolve this particular problem, in my view, is a travesty. It sends exactly the wrong message about how cognizant we are of the urgency of this legislation. I am troubled not only by the fact that it is on this bill, but by the proposal itself as it is now structured. I am troubled for three reasons. First of all, the level set, the 100-percent level of last year's appropriated amount, is substantially below the amount that we have just agreed in bipartisan budget negotiations would be the investments we make in education and in health care, in safe streets, in agriculture, in transportation, and in the array of investments that we spent so much time negotiating over the course of the last month. What does this say to those who have committed, now, as this Senator has, to that agreement? That we did not mean it? That, indeed, we are willing now to settle for investments substantially below those that we agreed to just last week? That is what we are saying with this particular level of commitment in a continuing resolution, that it does not matter what we agreed to, because now we are going to submit to a much lower level. That means 285,000 students lose Pell grants, 37,000 kids are cut from Head Start, 20,000 workers are dislocated from job training, 1,400 school districts lose aid, 640 Superfund sites do not get any help, 960 NIH research projects will be killed, public safety and crime prevention will be affected, 350 fewer air traffic controllers would be hired, and 390 fewer FBI agents would be hired. Mr. President, we understood the need for a commitment in all of those and many other areas. For us now to negate that is very troubling. That is point one. Point two: There will be needs that we must address in the future that we do not yet know about. We just had a discussion this morning by Republicans and Democratic Senators representing States most directly affected by this disaster. We all recognize that we do not know what it is we are going to be doing in the coming months with regard to this disaster because we do not know yet what the circumstances will bring. But we do know this: Because we cannot predict it all, we know we will have to go back again. We will have to talk to the distinguished Senator from Alaska, we will have to talk and consult with the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, we are going to be back again with corrections, with a need for additional commitments that we cannot contemplate now. To lock in a continuing resolution, to say we are not going to be cognizant, we are not going to be responsive to those particular needs this fall does a real disservice to the bill itself. Finally, Mr. President, this is an exercise in futility. That is what is most disconcerting. The President said he will be compelled for the reasons I just stated to veto this bill. I have a letter, signed by 38 U.S. Senators, who will commit to sustaining that veto. I ask unanimous consent to have that letter printed in the Record at this time.

Mr. DASCHLE. As a result of the flooding and the extremely high water levels on Lake Oahe this year, its banks are sloughing, causing the intake pipes for the Gettysburg drinking water system to crack and break, endangering the water supply for the city. The best solution to this problem is to connect the city to the Mid- Dakota Rural Water System. The city is scheduled to be connected to the Mid-Dakota RWS in 1998 or 1999, at a cost of $1.5 million. If this money were made available this year, we could ensure that the residents of Gettysburg will have a safe stable supply of drinking water, despite these flooding-related problems. It is my understanding that the Appropriations Committee has provided $6.5 million in the emergency supplemental spending bill for the Rural Utilities Service to address problems such as this. I very much appreciate the committee's willingness to add these funds to the bill. It is my hope and expectation that some of those funds could be used to help Gettysburg connect to the Mid-Dakota project this year.

Mr. DASCHLE. I would like to engage my colleagues on the Senate Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee in a colloquy.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, this veto ought not be necessary. This veto ought not even be necessary to consider today. This veto represents a determination by the President that this Congress do the job for which we were all sworn to do. We can do it right. We can complete the appropriations bills on time. We can be responsive to the needs that we anticipate this fall. We can recognize that the budget agreement we have agreed to is one that we will toil through and that the agreement is better than what we imply with this amendment, that our word is our bond and that we are going to commit to that level of investment this year, next year, and for the next 5 years. That is why this legislation, this amendment, is so ill-advised. It breaks the agreement. It discounts the need to come back, and it will be vetoed. Mr. President, I urge we reject the automatic CR by supporting the amendment of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia if we cannot find a way with which to resolve it through compromise. I stand ready to continue to find ways with which to make compromise possible, and I hope we could do it prior to the time we find the need to vote on final passage. Short of that, Mr. President, I hope Senators will realize the extraordinary repercussions that this provision will have for this bill. I urge support for the amendment to strike the automatic CR. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the tragic days of the Dirty Thirties are still remembered by many in my State. As an unbreakable drought settled over our region, the fields dried and the crops withered. Hot, dry winds whipped the dust into dark clouds that blew over the land and settled in great drifts on the ground. It was a desperate time for our State. Destitute and facing foreclosure, many South Dakotans had no choice but to abandon the farms in which they had invested countless years of labor. These losses rippled through our economy with a devastating effect, stripping businesses of their livelihood and farmworkers of their jobs. As the lines of the unemployed grew, so did a feeling of hopelessness among our people. It was in the midst of this terrible Depression that one of our Nation's greatest Presidents, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, offered hope to the people of South Dakota. Through the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Works Progress Administration [WPA], he provided jobs for South Dakotans, and gave us back the dignity that comes with earning your keep. Roosevelt's mark can still be seen across the State, where the thousands of people he put to work left stadiums, sewer systems, and miles of highways and sidewalks as their legacy. In Milbank, a quiet, friendly town in the northeast corner of my State, the WPA-built municipal water system still ingeniously delivers water from springs outside of town without the work of a single pump. And only recently was the stretch of Highway 12 that runs through Milbank, built by WPA workers and nearly six decades old, finally repaved. After all Franklin Roosevelt gave to South Dakota and the people of Milbank, I am pleased to say that we have had the rare and wonderful opportunity to give something back to him. Mr. President, last week the long-awaited memorial to Franklin Roosevelt was unveiled. Over 800 feet long, its rough-hewn granite walls form outdoor rooms that honor each of Roosevelt's four terms as President. I am proud to say that the stone for this memorial was quarried by workers in Milbank. Nearly 60 years after Roosevelt put the citizens of Milbank to work in the WPA, they have again been hard at work for him, cutting and hammering the granite for our memorial to the man who led our Nation through its worst depression and most terrible war. Quarrying this granite has been a source of deep inspiration and pride for the workers of the Cold Springs Granite Co., which owns the quarry. Often working in the bitter cold, their fierce dedication ensured that the 4,500 hundred tons of stone they cut reached Washington safely and on schedule. This was no mean feat--to meet the needs of the memorial, the 3- billion-year-old layer of granite that runs beneath Milbank was cut in pieces weighing up to 100 tons. These monstrous stones then had to be carefully raised, without cracking or falling, from the base of a pit 140 feet beneath the ground. Once they reached the surface, the stones were sent by flatbed truck to Cold Springs, MN, where workers shaped them according to the models of Lawrence Halprin, the designer of the monument. According to workers like Frank Hermans, who has worked in the quarry his entire adult life, the job gave him and his coworkers the chance to leave their mark in history. ``We can say we were part of something,'' he said. ``Not many get the chance to say that.'' I know I speak for my colleagues as I say thank you to the workers of Milbank for their dedication and hours of labor. Their efforts have helped the Nation to honor a man who gave us hope when we were hopeless and the determination to fight when our freedom was threatened. Mr. President, the Washington Post recently printed an outstanding article on quarrying of the memorial's granite. I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in today's Record a summary of a longer report on a November 1996 trip taken by a congressional delegation consisting of Senators Glenn, Leahy, Dorgan, Kempthorne, and myself. The delegation traveled to Vietnam, China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, meeting with senior government officials in each location. The summary discusses the highlights of the trip. The full report is also available. As the trip report summary highlights, members of the delegation raised important U.S. national priorities in each country and gained valuable insight into the leaders' views.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I want to recognize one of America's great labor leaders--Moe Biller, president of the American Postal Workers Union, AFL-CIO--on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of his hiring by the Postal Service. On May 8, 1937, Moe Biller was hired as a postal clerk in New York City by what was then called the U.S. Post Office Department, beginning a long career of service to the American public. At the same time, Moe became a postal union member and activist--a journey that led him to the presidency of his New York City local in 1959 and then to the presidency of the national APWU in 1980. Moe's six decades of service included 2 years during World War II in the Army's Adjutant General Corps from 1943 to 1945, where most of his service was in Northern Ireland. We thank him for this service as well. Moe's steadfast and determined struggle on behalf of all postal workers led to enactment of the Postal Reform Act of 1970. By virtue of that legislation, postal workers were given the right to bargain for wages, benefits, and working conditions under the National Labor Relations Act. These events also led to the merger of five separate craft unions into the APWU in 1971, an historic event in postal labor history in which Moe played a leading role. At 81 years young and still going strong, Moe has rightfully been called the ``dean'' of the American labor movement and is held in high regard within the highest councils of the AFL-CIO and its affiliated unions. As we wish Moe congratulations on this, his 60th postal anniversary, we look forward to many more years of visionary leadership on his part. Congratulations, Moe Biller.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I want to thank the committee for adding $1,059,000 to the supplemental spending bill for the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I am particularly grateful to the efforts of Senators Gorton, Stevens and Byrd in working to ensure sufficient funding in this bill to mitigate the impacts of this year's weather disasters on so many tribes, including those in South Dakota. It is my hope that of the funds appropriated in the bill for the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau will consider the additional needs of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe for welfare assistance costs, the Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition to support their work in helping the tribes of my region obtain disaster assistance, the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe for snow removal, and the Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe for snow removal.

Mr. DASCHLE. Since the markup, I have received a request for an additional $1,200,000 for emergency assistance for the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe in South Dakota. The Crow Creek community of Fort Thompson suffered damages that require road repairs, monitoring and cleanup of sewage, repairs to the tribal administration building, and repair to the irrigation pump on the tribal farm. Is it the chairman's belief that these repairs can be accomplished within the funding provided?

Mr. DASCHLE. I support the amendments offered by my colleague from North Dakota but understand the concerns of the distinguished Senator from Indiana. Would my colleague from Indiana agree to a review by the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, of these and other disaster related credit issues affecting farmers and ranchers?

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, many farmers and ranchers in South Dakota have contacted me over the past few months to express their concerns with the eligibility requirements and availability of Department of Agriculture disaster loans. I had hoped these could be addressed in the supplemental appropriation bill.

Mr. DASCHLE. As the Senator knows, the Dakotas and many upper Midwestern States were battered by a series of storms this winter and spring. Many of the States affected by weather-related emergencies are still battling and will not have a complete or accurate assessment of the damage until later this spring. Indian tribes, many of which live in remote areas, are among those whose communities suffer most in this kind of disaster.

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

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

Mr. DASCHLE. I will be very brief because I think I may be the last person to address this amendment tonight. I first want to acknowledge the contribution made in the debate by Senators Levin, Lieberman, Biden, and others who spoke so eloquently about the reasons why this amendment is ill-advised. I have great respect and admiration for the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin and the Senator from Texas, but I must say, passage of this amendment, as well intended as it might be, is unwise. First, as the Senator from Alaska has noted, this amendment has no real legislative effect because it appropriates money only for this fiscal year ending September 30, 1997. But it does have a profound effect in the message it sends to people around the world, especially in that part of the world most directly affected by our actions and by our intentions. For us to say unequivocally that regardless of circumstance, regardless of the situation, regardless of whether or not there is peace and the kind of stability we have been able to achieve now in the last couple of years, that we are removing every vestige of U.S. military presence, in my view, sends exactly the wrong message. We need to be very careful about the message we send. We need to ensure that our military presence there has the maximum effect for as long as it may be required. It is somewhat ironic to me that the same people--and I am not referring to any particular Senator in this regard--but many of the same people who advocate a permanent presence in NATO where we do not see any specific need for a U.S. presence today are those who are arguing against our presence in Bosnia. Mr. President, I think our military efforts in Bosnia have been a spectacular success. And they have been successful because we have had strong, bipartisan support in Congress for our military presence that sends a clear message to the people in the region. That message says clearly that we want the genocide to stop. We want the warring parties to come to terms. We want to recognize the extraordinary effort that has already been made by those who are putting their lives on the line to ensure that we succeed in retaining the peace and stability and long-term political viability of the region. U.S. policy through the Dayton accords has succeeded stopping the killing in Bosnia and in helping Bosnians forge longer term stability. We have succeeded in doing something of great consequence. I just hope that we recognize what a tremendous contribution it has been. While we all want to see that day when the United States forces are no longer deployed in Bosnia, we want them to come home with confidence, knowing that, regardless of whether we are there or not, we will continue to see the kind of success that we have experienced since implementation of the Dayton accords began in December 1995. But for us to say with certainty today that we know exactly when that date is, is shortsighted and ill-advised. I hope for those reasons the Senate will reject that amendment. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE. I would like to engage my colleague Senator Gorton, the chairman of the Subcommittee on Interior and Related Agencies, in a colloquy on the Interior portion of the bill.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I appreciate very much the chance to respond to the eloquence of my friend, the majority leader. And indeed his remarks are eloquent, although misinformed. And so I felt the need to come to the floor to clarify for the Record and for his information our position with regard to the bill. First of all, there is no Democratic position with regard to not offering amendments. I do not know where that information was generated, but I must tell you our hope is to expedite consideration of the bill. The current amendment offered by the Senator from Nevada, Mr. Reid, is being negotiated, as the majority leader indicated, and he was asked by Members on his side not to press for a vote until this can be negotiated. So in compliance with the request from the Republicans, we have not pursued a vote. But our desire is to offer amendments, to lay this one aside if the need may be, but, regardless, to move the bill along. If a cloture motion is filed, I will encourage every member of our caucus to support it. And my expectation is they will. So we want to work with the majority leader in getting this legislation passed. I share his concern about the large number of amendments. I urge our colleagues to be prudent in offering amendments. I must say, some people did not have the same opportunity as those in the committee to offer extraneous legislation. And that extraneous legislation is the source of some concern to many of us. I am hopeful that negotiations can lead ultimately to a successful elimination of many of these matters prior to the time we reach final passage. I do not want to shut the Government down either. We have been through some very difficult times in the past Congress with regard to shutting the Government down. If that were the only concern, I do not think we would have a problem. Our concern is the degree to which deep cuts are made in investments that we have already negotiated. And really it renders null and void the very budget agreement that I have enthusiastically endorsed that has culminated from our discussions last week. To say we are going to agree to certain levels of investments, and then deeply cut those in the very year that they were agreed upon, is not keeping very good faith. That would be the first concern we have with regard to this particular automatic continuing resolution provision. The second concern was addressed by some of our colleagues on the other side, as reported in Inside Congress on April 18. It says Republicans support the automatic continuing resolution because it, would remove President Bill Clinton's upper hand in this year's budget talks and remove his ability to influence current appropriations bills. Those kinds of statements cause us to be very wary, frankly, about what the real motivation is here. We do not want to put the Congress on automatic pilot. We do not want to cut out the role the President ought to have as he negotiates with us what levels of investments we make in many of these areas. I do not know if there are political considerations here or not. The best way with which to have a debate about this very important piece of legislation is to do it outside an emergency spending bill. I know the majority leader is working in good faith to see if we can find a reasonable compromise. I hope we can work together to make that happen. As to the bill itself, nothing could be more important than for us to successfully conclude consideration of this legislation early this week and to get it off to the President as quickly as possible. The bill ought to enjoy the support of every Member of this body. The sooner we can get it off to the President, the better. The only way we can get it off to the President, without a veto, is to successfully conclude some negotiation with regard to the continuing resolution and these other very sticky issues that were not added on the floor but were added in the committee, even though they are extraneous to this particular bill. We would not be in the delay that we are now in were they not added in the first place. Because they were added, we now have to deal with that. They knew they were controversial when they were added, but they were added anyway. Now we have to contend with it. We are doing our best to work with the majority leader to do so successfully. I thank the majority leader for his statement today and hope he will recognize that there is no delay on our side with regard to the consideration of this bill, and we will work with him as best we can under these circumstances to get it done as quickly as possible. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE. There are 54 Republican amendments out of the 120 amendments filed.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Reserving the right to object, I will not object, but I only ask my dear friend, the majority leader, whether he has prepared some time this week to take up the legislation he and I have discussed on occasion having to do with legislating on appropriations. That is a matter he and I have agreed to try to resolve at the earliest possible date, by rollcall vote. We would hope legislatively we could address it this week. We would not have this problem if we were not legislating on appropriations. We are doing that. I know the majority leader shares my view because he said publicly on the floor this was a mistake. We are living with that mistake right now. The sooner we can expedite consideration of that particular legislative initiative, I think it would be very helpful, and it would solve a lot of his problems, reduce his headaches, and get us back to where we should be with regard to the appropriations process. Mr. President, I have no objection to the unanimous-consent request.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, this Saturday, May 3, marks the 50th anniversary of sculptor Korczak Ziolkowski's arrival in the Black Hills to accept the invitation of the Lakota to create a memorial to honor the great warrior and chieftain, Crazy Horse. Carving this great monument in the mountain became his life's work, and indeed, the life's work of generations of his family. He was joined at Thunderhead Mountain by Ruth Ross on June 21, 1947, who is now a dear friend of mine. The two married 3 years later, and together they made a life raising their 10 children and slowly shaping the mountain into the form of Crazy Horse, sitting atop his steed with his arm outstretched toward the homelands of the Lakota. Its scale is difficult to comprehend. His face alone is so large that all four faces carved on Mount Rushmore could fit on its expanse. When it is finished, the sculpture will be taller than both the Washington Monument and the Great Pyramids. These figures are made all the more remarkable by the fact that all of the work at the memorial is privately financed, with no support from Government funds. Although Korczak died in 1982, Ruth and the children have proudly carried on with this vision. No less remarkable is the extraordinary effort made by the Ziolkowski family to educate thousands about the lives of Crazy Horse and the Lakota people, and to improve the lives of Native Americans around the country. Through the Crazy Horse Memorial Foundation, the family oversees a cultural and educational center offering college courses, a research library, the Indian Museum of North America and educational outreach programs. In addition, the Crazy Horse Memorial Native American Scholarship Program has already awarded a total of $175,000 in educational grants. Ultimately, the family hopes to fulfill Korczak's dream of opening a university and medical center on these grounds. Korczak liked to call himself a ``storyteller in stone,'' and believed that the monument was a noble offering to a man who led his people in battle at Little Bighorn and died before surrendering himself to a white man's prison. I commend Ruth and all the Ziolkowski family in their 50th year of fulfilling this vision.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I wanted to come to the floor prior to the vote to respond briefly to the distinguished majority leader. We have had the good fortune to work together on a number of issues, and I am disappointed that at least to date on this matter we have not been able to find common agreement. I am disappointed with his announcement that we would not be taking up additional legislation, which I assume he meant even the emergency supplemental disaster assistance legislation until we dispose of this bill. I have expressed my concerns already about the need to expedite consideration of disaster help to 23 States who are waiting for us to respond quickly. The situation all through the country, but especially in the upper Midwest, is very severe. There are thousands of people who are homeless today as a result of the floods and natural disasters that they have had to face, thousands of people without businesses, thousands of people without homes, and thousands of people without schools. These thousands of people, hopefully, will be able to get through in spite of these difficulties and who still have hope that we can respond as quickly as possible. I do not know who the anonymous donor was, but apparently an anonymous donor has agreed to provide $2,000 to every person living in Grand Forks and East Grand Forks to help them get through these difficulties. We estimate that is at least a $10 million contribution. Well, if somebody, anonymously, can do that, it seems to me that this Congress can also respond--obviously, without anonymity--but as quickly and as effectively as this donor has. So I hope that we can move this. I hope we are not going to subject this to extraneous legislation and I hope that, regardless of whether we agree or disagree on this particular bill, we recognize the urgency with which we have to deal with this issue and come to grips with it and respond, as we have in other emergency situations. We ought to recognize that it is not Democrats or Republicans who are going to suffer the consequences of delay; it is farmers, businesses, children, hospitals, and so many people who await our decision--not by the week or the day, but by the hour. So we don't have much opportunity. South Dakota was hit, Mississippi was hit, North Dakota was hit--23 States. So we all know the dramatic repercussions that natural disasters can have, and we know how critical it is that we respond as quickly as possible. On this particular piece of legislation, I have a great respect for the distinguished Senator from Georgia. I differ with him on this particular bill, in part, because I, frankly, think there is a better way to do it. Congressman Porter, Senator Leahy, and others have worked on legislation that would allow us to deal with the legitimate circumstances presented by the distinguished Senator from Georgia, but in a way that also protects individuals who may be physically abused or sexually abused, or who may be victims of circumstance and have no recourse if this legislation were to pass. We want to be sure that we can provide a meaningful way with which to provide the balance, I guess, between the need of victims to address problems and the need for volunteer organizations to be protected from lawsuits that, in many cases, are frivolous. So we are seeking balance here. I think we can provide better balance in the Porter-Leahy legislation. The majority leader came to the floor this morning and put a new urgency on this bill that I had not heard before. If there was such urgency, it is somewhat surprising to me that our Republican colleagues did not see fit to move it through the legislative process with the same degree of urgency. Why didn't we hold hearings immediately upon the introduction of the bill? Why didn't we have a markup in the committee if it was so urgent? Why hasn't there been more discussion? And why wasn't the Democratic leader consulted about the urgency and the nature of this legislation weeks ago, to say this week we are going to take this up because it is urgent? No one said anything to me about urgency. I first heard about urgency today. I am puzzled by the urgency that we have now attributed to this legislation, given the record. So I hope, Mr. President, that we can figure out a way to compromise on this legislation in a way that would allow us to expeditiously move this process along. Regardless of circumstance, I hope that we will not hold hostage the emergency disaster legislation in an effort to leverage passage of this bill. We can do better than that. There ought to be ways with which to work this out, as we have found the ability to work out so many other somewhat controversial and, at times, complicated pieces of legislation. Two weeks ago, we got a unanimous consent agreement that was four pages long. If we can pass a unanimous consent agreement that is that complex, taking us four pages, on a treaty as controversial as chemical weapons was just last week, it seems to me that we ought to take something for which there ought to be broad-based interest and support and find a way to compromise this in a way that allows us to move it along. Quite clearly, there is another matter involved here. The papers addressed it this morning. We are equally troubled by the fact that Ms. Herman has been subjected to an amazing array of practices that I hope will cease. She has had her hearing. She has been investigated, reinvestigated, and subjected to an array of questions. She has been brought in for special meetings and special explanations. She has been the subject of a great deal of rumor, innuendo, and media outlets across the country. She has presented herself in a way that I think is as professional as any I have ever seen. The President deserves the right to have his advisers, to have his Cabinet working with him. Once we have decided that she is qualified--and I guess that based upon the unanimity with which she was approved in the committee, there is a bipartisan recognition of her qualifications--that should be it. She has dispelled all the questions. She has responded as affirmatively as she knows how to do. The President has made public his choice. What is there left that must be done to advance her nomination? We have tried to negotiate. We have tried in as many ways as possible to work through this. We are left with no recourse but to oppose cloture so long as we can't get some understanding of what there is left to do in the case of the nomination of Alexis Herman to be Secretary of Labor. So we want to move that, too. We want to find a way to resolve that impediment as well. It is not our desire to hold things up. But when we bypass the committees and then don't take up legislation or nominations that certainly warrant consideration on the Senate floor in an expeditious manner, whether it is the emergency supplemental or the nomination of a Labor Secretary who has been confirmed now for some time by the committee itself, then the question comes, what options do we have left? At least the volunteer bill gets a cloture vote. Maybe we ought to subject Ms. Herman to a vote, and if there is a certain degree of opposition to that, we can have a cloture vote on her nomination. But we don't even get that. So this isn't the way I hoped we could achieve more meaningful bipartisanship on a whole array of issues. I hope we can do that on all of the bills I mentioned and all of the nominations still pending on the Executive Calendar. I might say, Mr. President--on the number of nominations--the other day when I looked, there were four pages of them on the Senate Calendar. I see now on page 11, ``Nominations Placed on the Secretary's Desk,'' are now such that we have virtually 11 pages of them, of people that await confirmation, await a decision by the Senate, people whose lives are affected by delay, just as my disaster victims are affected by delay. The question is, how much longer will they wait? What is it they must wait for? Is it a concern about their qualifications? Is it a concern about something in their background? Is it simply an unwillingness on the part of the majority to deal with the business that we have available to us, which we must address? Every President has the right to make nominations and to make decisions with regard to the personnel in his or her administration. That is the least we can afford this administration, but more importantly, the least we ought to be able to afford those people whose names are on these 11 pages. So let's get on with the business and let's move ahead. Let's find a compromise on this bill. Let's confirm Ms. Herman. And above and beyond everything else, let's make absolutely certain that we pass the disaster bill as quickly as possible. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I thank the majority leader for his explanation and for his description of the current set of circumstances. We have known now for some time that the delay in confirming Ms. Herman had little to do with her qualifications or the degree to which there was support on the Senate floor. It had to do with the dispute over Federal contracting. I am pleased that the dispute has ended and that we find some applicable resolution to that issue. I have not seen the details of that particular agreement, but I am very pleased that, at long last, Ms. Herman will have the opportunity to serve in her new capacity as Secretary of Labor. We look forward to working with her, and it is my expectation that there will be an overwhelming vote this afternoon on her behalf. We look forward to beginning as early as next week to see her in office and working closely with us on an array of very important matters to be taken up in the next 2 years. I yield the floor.