Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I am happy to yield time from the leader's allocation, if we are out of time.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I know we are about to vote. I will take whatever time I require from my leader time to make a couple of closing remarks with regard to this amendment. I appreciate very much the great work done by so many of our colleagues over the course of the last several months on this issue. The Senator from Montana, Mr. Baucus, and the other Senator from Montana, Mr. Burns, and my colleague from South Dakota, Mr. Johnson, and so many of our colleagues who have worked diligently to make the case to report to this body the gravity of the situation we now face, all deserve commendation. As I traveled through South Dakota in August during my unscheduled driving, the comment I got most from people in every situation--people on Main Street, people in government, people on farms and ranches--was simply this: Help us with the drought. If you want to deal with the economy, help us solve this problem now. The situation could not be any more grave than it is in the western part of my State. Statistically, this situation is the worst it has been in some counties since 1936. So, there is no other option than for us to answer the call made to us all as we traveled our States last month: Help us with the drought. Provide the assistance. Do what is right. Recognize that as we have dealt with crises and natural disasters in the past, we must now do the same. That is what this amendment does. We would respond with generosity and we would respond with commitment if there was a hurricane. We would respond with generosity if there was a flood. We would respond with generosity it there was an earthquake. Let us respond with the same commitment and resolve in this drought as we would with any other natural disaster. That is what this amendment does. We have actually saved a great deal of money because prices are higher than projected when the farm bill passed. We don't need an offset. We simply know these resources can be re-dedicated to rural America without the commitment of an offset per se. This is an emergency. We must send a clear message that, without this help, we will lose many of those leaders in the agricultural community throughout our country that we rely on every day. So I urge my colleagues to do the right thing and recognize the urgency of the need for this emergency disaster assistance, to support it on an overwhelmingly bipartisan basis this morning and send a clear message that help is on the way. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, there are two Senators who have sought recognition prior to the time we vote. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Gramm of Texas and Senator Conrad of North Dakota both be given 2 minutes prior to the vote and that the vote occur immediately thereafter.

Mr. DASCHLE. I move to waive the relevant portion of the Budget Act, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The Presiding Officer. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I know there are Senators who wish to travel to their States to accommodate the remembrance ceremonies with which many are involved tomorrow. As a result of that understanding and in appreciation of the need for travel, it is my expectation to withhold scheduling any additional votes today and then to announce that there will be no votes tomorrow. So Senators who have an interest in traveling are welcome to do so. We have had a number of requests from Senators on both sides of the aisle. To accommodate those requests, that will be the decision. There will be votes early, at least I should say midmorning, on Thursday. Senators should be prepared to come and participate in debate and be prepared to vote as early as 10 or 10:30 on Thursday. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I am pleased the Senate has passed H.R. 3287/S. 2907, a bill to rename the Brentwood postal facility after Joseph P. Curseen, Jr. and Thomas L. Morris, Jr. I can think of nothing more appropriate to honor the memory and tireless service of these two men. Our action today clears the way for the President to sign the bill into law. I especially recognize Celeste Curseen and Mary Morris. While nothing can erase the suffering of the Morris and Curseen families, I hope that the building will stand as a permanent reminder of the ultimate sacrifice made by Thomas Morris and Joseph Curseen. It has been said that ``neither snow nor rain nor heat nor gloom of night stays these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds.'' On October 15, 2001, that list was expanded when an anthrax- tainted letter was opened in my office. We later learned that its spread was far greater than first expected. A second letter addressed to the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Leahy, was discovered weeks later. The Hart Senate Office Building was closed for more than three months. It took nearly six months to remediate and renovate my own office in that building. In the end, nearly a dozen people nationwide contracted inhalation anthrax, and five people, including Thomas Morris and Joseph Curseen, died as a result of this senseless act of bioterrorism. Today, nearly a year later, the Brentwood facility where the letter was processed remains closed, with plans underway for a complete remediation and reopening of that building. Never again can anyone take the delivery of their mail for granted. My staff and I feel a special kinship with the postal workers and others affected by these attacks. While the uncertainty and horror of October 15--the day the letter addressed to me was opened in my office--and the ensuing months were very real for us, the suffering of those struck by the disease was even greater. We can only imagine the pain experienced by Thomas Morris, Joseph Curseen, and their families, pain shared by the families of Robert Stevens, Kathy Thi Nguyen, and Ottilie Lundgren, who also lost their lives as a result of this terrorist act. Fortunately, LeRoy Richmond, Norma Wallace, ``George Fairfax,'' David Hose, and Ernesto Blanco survived their battles with inhalation anthrax, but we know how terrifying their experience must have been and that they continue to suffer the physical and emotional after-effects. Still others--including three postal workers--dealt with the fear and pain associated with the cutaneous form of the disease. Postal workers are some of America's quiet heroes. They are on the front lines of the war on terrorism here at home--keeping Americans safe and keeping all of us connected through the U.S. mail. Ask many of them, and they will probably say they are just ``doing their job.'' But we know it is more than that, and today we recognize their hard work and diligence by honoring two of their fallen comrades. The Joseph Curseen, Jr. and Thomas Morris, Jr. Processing and Distribution Center will forever stand as a memorial to their sacrifice in the line of duty.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia has consolidated for adjudication a number of challenges pending before it to the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, which Congress enacted into law this spring. These challenges include the lead case, which was filed by our colleague, Senator McConnell. Four of our other colleagues who played major roles in the passage of this landmark law, Senators McCain, Feingold, Snowe, and Jeffords, have intervened to join in defending the act. Recognizing the significant constitutional issues presented by the passage of this landmark legislation, the Senate acted to ensure that Senators on both sides of the constitutional questions would be able to present their views in court. Since these lawsuits were filed shortly after the law was signed, there have been comprehensive pretrial proceedings under the supervision of the three-judge court that is handling this case. The court is aiming to decide this case as soon as possible after the law takes effect after the mid-term elections in November, and in time for the Supreme Court to hear the inevitable appeal in its forthcoming term. As part of the proceedings in the discovery phase of the case, the Members who are participating on either side of the controversy have each been asked to give deposition testimony. Accordingly, at the Members' joint request, the enclosed resolution would authorize them to provide testimony in these cases, except, in keeping with Senate practice, when a privilege should be asserted under the speech or debate clause or when their presence is required on the Senate floor. Finally, in order to ensure that the Senate's interests are protected in connection with the discovery process in this matter, the resolution authorizes the Senate Legal Counsel to appear in this litigation as an amicus curiae in the name of the Senate to assist in the presentation of views, to the parties, and, if necessary, the court, of the applicability of the principles of legislative privilege to discovery issues arising in this litigation.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, first of all, let me also express publicly my appreciation to Senator Byrd for his accommodation of my schedule this morning. He was prepared to offer his amendment some time ago and withheld doing so in order to accommodate my schedule. As always, he is very courteous, and has been very helpful to me in this case. I appreciate his cooperation. Madam President, when the Senate passed the farm bill 202 days ago, we agreed, overwhelmingly, to include assistance for farmers and ranchers who suffered serious economic losses as a result of natural disasters during the crop-year of last year. Madam President, 69 Senators--Republicans and Democrats--voted to include that assistance in the farm bill. The administration at that time, and Republican House leaders, objected. In conference, they threatened to block any farm bill from passing unless we removed the natural disaster assistance for this year. They said they would block all assistance for farmers and ranchers unless we agreed to drop disaster assistance. So, reluctantly, we agreed. But we said, when the farm bill passed, that the need for disaster assistance for farmers and ranchers would not go away. It would only get worse, and we would have to revisit the issue. That is what we are doing once again today. Our amendment is simple and straightforward. It does not create a new program. All it does is fund existing crop loss and livestock assistance programs for this year and last year. It does, in other words, exactly what 69 Senators agreed to do 202 days ago. There are some who said we should not spend another dollar on agriculture. They say the new farm bill is more than generous. I want to make an important distinction. The new farm bill covers loss due to low prices. It does not cover losses due to natural disasters. Farmers and ranchers all across America are suffering staggering losses due to natural disasters. In fact, in yesterday's Wall Street Journal there was a report that indicated the current drought may be the most expensive in all of U.S. history. According to the Journal: The U.S. may be looking at the most expensive drought in United States history, inflicting economic damage far beyond the Farm Belt. In South Dakota, the drought is costing farmers upwards of $5 million a day. All told, the impact on my State alone is estimated to be $1.8 billion to agriculture and rural business. Things are getting worse by the day. Some counties have had less rain this year than they had in 1936, at the height of the Dust Bowl. For as long as I can remember, the Congress has agreed that disaster relief constitutes an emergency. Disaster relief for wildfires, tornadoes, floods, or any other natural disaster is truly an emergency. It is astounding to me now that during what may be the most serious of all droughts we have had in U.S. history, some people would want to change that. They would say that farmers and ranchers don't need or don't deserve disaster assistance. They are wrong. The farm bill doesn't include funds to help farmers and ranchers weather this unprecedented set of circumstances. Unless we act, many of them simply will not survive. We should not discriminate against those who are hurting simply because of the nature of the disaster. Whether it is caused by floods or droughts or wildfires, whether it devastates Texas or South Dakota or any other State, an emergency is an emergency. Sixty-nine of us recognized that fundamental fact 202 days ago. I urge my colleagues to reaffirm it as we consider this amendment. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 4481, As Modified

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I want to also indicate my strong support for the amendment just offered by Senator Byrd. Like many States in the West and throughout the country, South Dakota has suffered this year, especially from fires that have devastated many parts of the Black Hills in particular. Thousands of acres have been lost. So, clearly, this legislation is needed. I am pleased the administration recently indicated, for the first time, its willingness to support, on an emergency basis, additional funds for firefighting. So I am grateful to the distinguished chairman for his amendment. I strongly support it. Amendment No. 4481 To Amendment No. 4480 Madam President, I am mystified, however, that the administration, while willing to support, on an emergency basis, the funds necessary to fight fires, has, at least up until now, expressed opposition to providing assistance to those who are suffering from drought. In many cases, drought can be just as devastating economically as fires. The response on the part of the Federal Government is every bit as important as it is for fires. There appears to be a disconnect between those who support funding to fight fires and those who oppose funding for purposes of fighting drought. So I intend to offer an amendment on behalf of Senators Baucus, Johnson, Harkin, Carnahan, Burns, Dorgan, Nelson of Nebraska, Stabenow, Levin, Clinton, Lincoln, Conrad, Wellstone, Dayton, Schumer, and Reid. I send the amendment to the desk.

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I would be happy to add the name of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd, as a cosponsor. I ask unanimous consent that he be added as a cosponsor of the amendment.

Mr. DASCHLE. If I could respond to the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, I would confirm that the issues raised just now by the distinguished Senator are ones to which we have agreed. Obviously, we have to incorporate the appropriate language in order to accommodate that agreement. It is my intention to do so. At some point, I will ask unanimous consent that the amendment be so modified to accommodate those requests. Let me reiterate, they would involve charging whatever funds may be used against the Agriculture Committee. I would draw a distinction between that implication or that requirement and any implication that that would entail using funds from the recently passed farm bill. The Congressional Budget Office has indicated we are not able to do that, to draw funds from the farm bill, per se. But none of us has any objection to charging the funds against the committee itself. Let me also say, we certainly have no objection to ensuring that those funds are taken from the fiscal year 2002 budget allocation and not the 2003. So we certainly would be in agreement with both recommendations and would be offering modifying language when we have it. I understand the language is now at the desk. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be so modified.

Mr. DASCHLE. I simply would then modify my amendment.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, we will move to reconsider all of these nominations en bloc and notify the President once they have been voted on. We won't need to go through each one of the motions following the actual voice vote.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and that the Senate now return to legislative session.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I know a number of our colleagues have indicated an interest in speaking on the issue. We will reserve a block of time immediately following the vote on the trade promotion authority conference report for that purpose.

Mr. DASCHLE. I ask unanimous consent for that request.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I move to waive the budget point of order under the relevant provisions of the Budget Act and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, we are making good progress in our effort to bring the debate on this bill to a close. I compliment the distinguished Senators, the managers of the bill, the chairman, and the ranking member. At a point when we are able to conclude the debate, I know Senator Levin would like to be recognized for a few minutes before that happens, we will go to final passage. There will then be an opportunity to vote on issues relating to the Executive Calendar--at this point I am not sure how many votes relating to the judicial nominations on the calendar, but it is my intention to go to many of the judges who are currently listed on the Executive Calendar. I would like to propound a unanimous consent request. It has been cleared by the distinguished Republican leader in regard to that matter. I ask unanimous consent that immediately following the disposition of the Defense appropriations bill, the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Executive Calendar No. 862, Henry Autrey, to be U.S. District Judge; that there be 4 minutes for debate equally divided between the chairman and ranking member of Judiciary Committee; that upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote immediately on confirmation of the nomination; that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table; the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; any statements thereon be printed in the Record; and the Senate then return to legislative session, with the preceding all occurring without any intervening action or debate.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, to repeat, there will be a vote on final passage, at least one, perhaps more votes on the judicial nominations that we have been able to clear. Then I would also note that we have one other vote at least after all of that, which is the vote on the final passage of the trade promotion authority conference report. There are Senators who had asked to be recognized for remarks prior to the time we have that vote. We will be consulting with them relating to the amount of time they will require. I urge Senators to be aware that after this block of votes, there will be at least one, maybe other important votes this afternoon. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I inform my colleagues when we conclude this series of votes, whatever the number may be--and we will clarify that after this vote--that will conclude the rollcalls for this week. So I urge my colleagues to stay on the floor. This is a 10-minute vote, and whatever additional votes will be 10- minute votes. If we have to wait 15 or 20 minutes, it just prolongs the time until we will have completed our work on this block of votes and then, therefore, the final, official vote of the week. So I urge my colleagues to stay on the floor and respond to the votes as their names are called. I thank the Chair.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chair of the Judiciary Committee. I appreciate very much his cooperation in this regard. Let me tell my colleagues who need to remember, even though we are going through these voice votes, there is one more rollcall vote on the conference report on the trade promotion authority legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consider the following nominations and that they be considered individually: Executive Calendar Nos. 863, 864, 865, 866, 867, 887, and 888.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I ask unanimous consent the next vote be 10 minutes in duration.