Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the previous agreement for 5 minutes to explain the amendment be vitiated.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Conrad be recognized to make a point of order.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I announce to my colleagues this is the last vote of the day.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, in the days and weeks following September 11, this Senate passed an unprecedented series of measures to help heal our wounded nation, protect America from future terrorist attacks, and bring to justice those who attacked us. Those days were among the most difficult any of us has ever experienced in our public lives. They were also some of our proudest days as Senators--because we were united. Because we rose to a challenge that few of us could have imagined until then. Today--nearly 9 months after the terrorist attacks we have not yet addressed the growing inability of many businesses to purchase adequate, affordable terrorism insurance. Democrats have made repeated good-faith offers to reach a bipartisan solution to this difficult problem. This Senate could have passed a terrorism insurance bill months ago--and it could already be law. The only reason it is not is because a small group of Senators in the other party are determined to use terrorism re-insurance as cover to push through radical changes in our legal system that they know do not have sufficient support to pass on their own merits. They are holding terrorism insurance, and America's economic security, hostage to try to force through an agenda that has nothing to do with September 11th, or with the threat of future terrorist attacks. Enough is enough. Last Friday, Senator Dodd introduced a good, balanced terrorism insurance bill, S-2600. I am now calling up that bill to see where the votes fall. We need to stop playing politics with this critical issue. I want to thank Senator Dodd for the extraordinary patience and leadership he has demonstrated on this issue over so many months. I also want to thank a number of our other colleagues--especially Senator Sarbanes, Senator Schumer and Senator Reid--for their help in producing this bill, as well as their many efforts to reach a bipartisan agreement on this matter. President Bush has asked the Senate repeatedly to pass terrorism insurance. So has the commercial real estate industry, the hotel industry, and many other industries employing tens of millions of Americans. Despite their requests, a small group of Republican Senators has refused to let any terrorism insurance bill pass unless it includes their extraneous plan to dramatically overhaul major parts of America's civil justice system. At a time when we are hearing new warnings almost every day about the possibility, even the ``inevitability'' of more terrorist attacks--when our economy is struggling to shake off a recession, such political gamesmanship is inexcusable. Before September 11th, terrorist attacks on America seemed unimaginable. Now, as a result of September 11th, such acts are becoming un-insurable. Consider a few facts: A recent survey by The Bond Market Association shows that lenders have placed on hold or canceled more than $7 billion in commercial mortgage loans because of ``the difficulty and expense'' of finding terrorism insurance coverage. According to a recent study by Moody's, ``virtually all terrorism insurance policies have some major gap, including carve-outs for certain types of terrorism and 30 day cancellation clauses.'' These policy gaps pose significant risks to investors. The lack of terrorism insurance for commercial real estate is also hurting ``commercial mortgage backed securities'' bonds that are backed entirely by mortgages on commercial buildings. Investors in this $270 billion market include pension funds, insurance companies and other institutions. Moody's and Fitch recently placed 22 commercial mortgage backed securities transactions--backed by more than $9 billion in commercial real estate loans, on a ``watch list'' for possible downgrade. In every one of the 22 transactions on that list, terrorism insurance for the collateral was either inadequate--or due to expire by this Fall. In addition, major hotel companies employing thousands of Americans have lost--or will soon lose--terrorism coverage. Businesses, museums, hospitals, gaming and sports facility owners, and builders all over the country are in similar straits. While a few insurers have come together to offer very narrow coverage, their policies they provide generally exclude coverage for nuclear, biological and chemical attacks--the very threats the government warns us are most likely to be used by terrorists. The growing gap in terrorism coverage threatens the stability of America's economy. The plain fact is: private insurers, alone, cannot close this gap. The potential loss is simply too great for any one company or industry to absorb. The federal government must be a partner. We've done it before. During World War II, the Government authorized a program, administered by private insurers, which insured property against ``enemy attack.'' We need a similar effort today. That is what this bill is about. The Congress is working closely with the President to improve the physical security of our nation. We should be no less vigilant in defending America's economic security from the catastrophic losses associated with terrorism. We must pass a terrorism bill. We cannot afford to let this critical measure be held hostage any longer by a handful of Senators who want to use it to pass extraneous measures. The risks to America's economic security is too great. The President has made that clear. The market is making it clear. We need to close the terrorism insurance gap now. No more delays. We urge our colleagues to join us.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which cloture was not invoked on S. 625, the hate crimes legislation.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I will use leader time to make my remarks this morning. I appreciate the debate we have had on this issue now for the last couple of days. I am struck by a couple of issues. First, I am struck by the number of hate crimes that occur every day. We are told there are over 20 hate crimes committed in the United States every day--every day. The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates the real number may be 50,000 a year. That comes out to five an hour. In the time we have had the debate just this morning, according to those statistics, 15 to 20 hate crimes have been committed in this country--in just the time the Senate has been in session this morning. If there is such a good job being done across this country as we deal with that volume, I would not be able to say that with any authority this morning, but the volume is there. That leads me to the second point. The second point is that behind each one of those statistics is a human being, a face, a story, a tragedy. That is, in essence, what this debate is all about--to end the tragedy in this country. As I consider the options we have available to us legislatively, I consider those options as they must have existed during the civil rights debates of the fifties and sixties, and I am sure when we considered the civil rights issues in the fifties and sixties there were all kinds of reasons it was not the time to deal with civil rights laws; it was not the time to come to closure on how to address the rampant racism that existed in the country at that time. Finally, it took leadership, it took resolve, it took bipartisan consensus and, ultimately, it took a willingness to commit to a bill. We passed the civil rights acts of the fifties and sixties, and today we are the better for it. Who today would say we are going to repeal those laws? They have been on the books, they have worked, and we take credit for the fact they have. This is our moment when it comes to hate crimes. This is our time to tell the Matthew Shepards of the world that we are not going to tolerate that anymore; that we are better than that; we are bigger than that. Just as we addressed racism in the past, we have to address the prejudice against sexual orientation today. This is our chance. This is our moment. This is our Civil Rights Act for the year 2002. We are not going to have many more. Let's seize this opportunity. Let's seize this moment. Let's send a clear message. Let's end those terrible statistics. We can do it when we vote on cloture in a matter of moments this morning. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, as the distinguished Republican leader and I discussed a few minutes ago, the plan is certainly to take up the Defense authorization bill prior to the time we leave for the July 4 recess. That has always been my intention. I have indicated that on several occasions to the Republican leader and to others, and that certainly is my intention again today. We know it will take some time. Senators have expressed an interest in offering some amendments to the bill, and they are in some cases not quite ready yet to go to the bill as they are examining amendment options. In the meantime, we want to also fulfill our obligation to Senators on the estate tax. We made that commitment some time ago, and we are hoping to do that. We are also talking to the Senator from Kansas, the Senator from California, and others about the cloning-stem cell research debate. We are hoping we can get a unanimous consent agreement to do that on Friday of this week and Monday. In addition to that, we are working on terrorism insurance, and we are hoping to get its passage before we leave. I would like to get a unanimous consent agreement on that matter. Senator Lott mentioned we were not able to get the budget language resolved. Unfortunately, our Republican colleagues objected to doing that last week during the debate on the supplemental, so we were precluded from doing that last week, but we will continue to work to find a way, hopefully without the objections of our Republican colleagues, on the budget as well. I will reiterate my commitment to the distinguished Republican leader that the Defense authorization bill is legislation we will finish prior to the time we leave for the July 4 recess.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, of course we will object to that. Let me reiterate, because the Senator has noted his desire as well to deal with cloning, to deal with terrorism insurance, to deal with a number of other issues, that I know he will be prepared to cooperate in scheduling. We have to take this a step at a time. We may not be ready to deal with Defense tomorrow, but we are going to be ready to deal with it before the end of this work period. So we will continue to do that. I look forward to working with him to find that date when we can accomplish all we need to accomplish in a very short period of time.

Mr. DASCHLE

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I wanted to announce that there will be no further votes today. I appreciate the vigorous debate we have had on the Conrad amendment, and appreciate Senators coming to the floor to move the schedule along. It is my hope that we will have a vote at approximately 2:30 tomorrow, and it may be stacked with another amendment. I urge Senators to offer their amendments because we will miss a window here, and we will then make a point of order on the bill itself sometime tomorrow. We are not going to wait for Senators. They are either going to offer their amendments or they are going to miss the opportunity. So those Senators who have amendments need to come to the floor and lay them down and have the debate, as Senator Conrad did this afternoon. We will pick up this debate again tomorrow morning. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that S. 2076 be star printed with the changes at the desk.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, the Senate will vote on cloture on the hate crimes legislation, therefore, at approximately 11:45 a.m.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, in an effort to anticipate whatever may come with regard to consideration of the debt limit legislation, I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 407, S. 2578, the debt limit increase and I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I now withdraw the motion to proceed.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I will have more to say about the so- called hate crimes legislation tomorrow. This is a very important cloture vote we are having tomorrow. I am disappointed that we have not had more opportunities to debate amendments. This bill has been pending, yet no one has come forward to offer amendments. It makes my point as we file cloture. We indicated a concern for the reports that had been shared with us that some of our colleagues wished to offer--I think the phrase was--``hundreds of amendments'' to the hate crimes bill. We are working under very tight time constraints. It is my belief that we ought to have an opportunity to offer amendments, to have the debate on the amendments, to bring those amendments to closure, and then have a vote on the hate crimes bill. I have heard colleagues in the Chamber on the other side of the aisle say this has never happened before. If it has not been submitted, tomorrow we will submit for the Record the number of times our Republican colleagues did exactly what we did. I think it was 34 times--34 times the bill was offered, and cloture was filed immediately. I do not know how many of those times the Republican leader--the majority leader at the time--chose to fill the parliamentary tree as well, denying and precluding Democrats and others from offering amendments to the bill. This is by far not the first time. I announced at the very beginning of my tenure as majority leader that I would never fill the tree to preclude amendments. And I am going to hold to that promise. But there are times when in order to move legislation along, filing cloture on a bill is important. I intend to do that again this afternoon. It is unfortunate. But we are going to have to increase the debt limit. The administration has made its case publicly. They have talked to me privately on numerous occasions about the importance of increasing the debt limit. We can go into all the reasons it is necessary. But in an effort not to at least now politicize the issue, I think it is important for us to get the job done. It is the responsible thing to do. We are going to take up the debt limit and send it to the House as quickly as possible because time is running out. We are told that we only have a couple of weeks. We have to address this issue in that period of time. If we fail cloture tomorrow on hate crimes, it will be my intention to move as quickly as possible to the debt limit legislation. That will require procedural cooperation. I am hopeful that we can get procedural cooperation. The Republican leader and I talked today. It would be my hope to get a unanimous consent agreement to take it up. Failing that, of course, we would then have to go through the motion to proceed, and then the bill itself.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Secretary of the Senate be permitted to display, in the Senate Chamber Lobby, information regarding the construction of the Capitol Visitor Center, and that such display and persons designated by the Secretary to answer questions about the display be permitted in the lobby on June 11, 2002, from the hours of 2:15 to 3:30 p.m.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m., Tuesday, June 11; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and there be a period of morning business until 10:45 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the first half of the time under the control of the majority leader or his designee and the second half of the time under the control of the Republican leader or his designee; that at 10:45 a.m., the Senate resume consideration of S. 625, with 60 minutes of debate prior to the vote on cloture on the hate crimes legislation; further, that Senators have until 10:45 a.m. to file second-degree amendments to the hate crimes legislation; that the live quorum with respect to the cloture motion filed earlier today be waived, and that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. for the weekly party conferences.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I wish to briefly discuss with the distinguished chairman of the Senate Defense Appropriations Committee the LITENING targeting pods--an issue of some concern to the Air National Guard in my state and many others around the country.

Mr. DASCHLE. As the chairman knows, on April 24th, in testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee, the Air National Guard (ANG) identified the procurement of 24 additional LITENING II targeting pods as their number one priority. At the present time, U.S. ANG fighter components equipped with the LITENING II targeting pods are participating in Operation Noble Eagle and Operation Enduring Freedom. By all accounts, the ANG aircraft are performing their combat missions with great success, due in large measure to the fact that the pods provide the aircraft with a precision target capability. As a result, the Air National Guard has established a requirement to equip additional ANG aircraft with the LITENING II pods. The South Dakota National Guard has indicated to me that their mission effectiveness would be greatly enhanced if we were to outfit their aircraft with these pods. Other Senators from other states have heard a similar message from their Guard units. We all agree that the procurement of an additional 24 LITENING II AT pods will greatly increase the Guard's ability to carry out its combat missions. Having said this, I am well aware of the many difficult decisions the Appropriations Committee made in crafting this Supplemental. Resources are not limitless and difficult choices must be made--both in the defense portions of this supplemental as well as the regular defense appropriations bill. As we wrap up debate on this important measure and begin preparing for conference, I hope we will do all we can to provide our military with all the resources and tools they need to fight and win the war on terrorism. Given the combat performance of the LITENING II pods and the high priority the ANG places on acquiring more, I hope we can reach an agreement to procure 24 additional targeting pods for the Guard.

Mr. DASCHLE. I thank the Senate for his support on this important matter. States Devastated by Flooding

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I have an amendment which I send to the desk.

Mr. DASCHLE. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I want to make sure everyone understands what it is we are debating on the Senate floor. The President made a request of the Senate to pass an emergency appropriation that would directly respond to the terrorist attacks in the United States. He asked for more money for defense. He asked for more money for homeland security. He asked for more money for New York. That is the pending legislation. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have said this bill is on a slow train to nowhere. Mr. President, it is disconcerting, at best, that on an issue of this import--dealing with troops overseas while the nation is on high alert after being told repeatedly in the last 3 weeks about the inevitability of a further attack--somebody has unconscionably come to the floor and slow-trained this important bill, slow-walked it, stopped it, brought it to a grinding halt. But that is exactly what is happening. We need to get this legislation passed. There ought to be a good debate about budget. We have been trying to do that. We will have one. But to offer a budget resolution on the amendment that is currently pending is inexcusable. It is politics. It has everything to do with slowing this bill down to a screeching halt and ignoring the plea of the President of the United States to enact this legislation as quickly as we can. That is what we are doing. Members of his party have said: We don't care what the President is requesting, we are going to slow-walk this, we are going to put this on a slow train, and we are not going to pass this legislation this week. We will vote against cloture tomorrow. We are actually going to continue to filibuster a bill the President has requested to deal with homeland defense, to deal with aid to New York, and to deal with the defense needs of this country. That is inexcusable. I move to table the second-degree amendment, 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.