Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I want to honor the commanding officer at Ellsworth Air Force Base--who has just returned home after directing Air Force operations over Afghanistan and who will become a brigadier general this week. This outstanding officer, Colonel Edward A. Rice, Jr., has demonstrated his leadership abilities in a number of settings, and my fellow Senators can expect to hear more of him as he assumes new roles and responsibilities in our nation's service. As commander of the 28th Air Expeditionary Wing, Colonel Rice directed the main Air Force combat group operating over Afghanistan from late September until mid-January. This force of 1,800 personnel and 30 planes (including B-1 bombers, B-52 bombers, and KC-10 tankers), delivered most of the ordnance that was so effective in shattering the Taliban and al Qaeda forces. All branches of the military played a role in this first victory in the war against terrorism, but as an Air Force veteran and a South Dakotan, I am particularly proud of the achievements of Colonel Rice and the forces under his command. Our experience in Afghanistan extends a military trend that began in our war against Iraq--the unprecedented ability of modern air power to achieve strategic objectives. Clearly our planes and munitions were markedly more precise, quicker to hit emerging targets, and generally more effective than the Soviet forces of the 1980s. A recent book labeled this trend ``The Transformation of American Air Power,'' and I believe Afghanistan will become the most recent example, joining the impressive results of the Gulf War, Kosovo, and our other Balkan campaigns. In addition, the 28th Air Expeditionary Wing broke new ground in several areas. Its bombers were the first to deliver our near-precision munitions in combat. These use navigational signals from GPS satellites to locate targets. They are much cheaper than laser-guided ``precision'' munitions and are not hampered by low-visibility weather conditions. Also, in coordination with ground spotters, the bombers were able to use advanced communications to reduce dramatically the time from target identification to target strike. Despite its controversial and troubled early years, I am also pleased that the B-1 continues its strong combat performance that began during Operation Desert Fox over Iraq and extended into the war in Kosovo. Its range and expansive bomb bays allowed it to make a round trip of nearly 6,000 miles, and also loiter over the battlefield with a variety of munitions, waiting for targets to emerge. Throughout this demanding, round-the-clock operation, Colonel Rice reports, B-1 made all scheduled takeoffs, released all weapons successfully, and delivered ordnance with excellent accuracy. Colonel Rice returned home from this mission about two weeks ago, just in time to be promoted to brigadier general. The Senate confirmed his nomination on September 26, 2001, and the pinning ceremony occurs Friday, February 1, at Ellsworth Air Force Base. Since arriving at Ellsworth in May 2000, Colonel Rice's performance has been impressive, and I know that as a general, he will be a tremendous asset for the Air Force. During Rice's tenure, Ellsworth has dramatically improved its maintenance performance, chalked up impressive results in its 2001 Operational Readiness Inspection, and moved to the front of the pack in Air Combat Command assessments of command, control and communication; bomb removal; and response to nuclear-biological-chemical (NBC) hazards. The men and women of Ellsworth have also benefitted from the dedicated service of Colonel Rice's wife, Teresa. When base personnel deployed for the war against terrorism. Teresa co-hosted a series of town-hall meetings with the acting base commander to update spouses and families on the status of their loved ones and to educate them on the role their family was playing to make America safe. In less stressful times, she volunteers twice a week in the base thrift shop, has been active in the Officer Spouses Club, and has organized and attended holiday parties, retirement ceremonies, promotion celebrations and farewells--too many to count. In closing, Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure to welcome Colonel Rice back home to Ellsworth after the successful execution of his mission in Operation enduring Freedom. His remaining time in South Dakota grows short, but I know I speak for many South Dakotans when I say it has been an honor to work with him and Teresa and to call them neighbors. They are a credit to their country, and we wish them all the best.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I wish to speak briefly on the progress we have made this week on a couple of matters. We will soon propound a list of nominations. There will be 43 nominations total. Two of those have already been considered; that is, the confirmation of two Federal judges. But there are 36 other nominations, including 10 Ambassadorial nominations which will be presented to the Senate in a short period of time. I thank colleagues on my side of the aisle in particular for their cooperative effort. A lot of these nominations have worked their way through the committee. Chairmen and members of the committees have cooperated with the administration. We are now in the position to move quite a large number of these executive nominations at the very beginning of this session of Congress. There are others we hope to move, including additional judges. But obviously we continue to hope the administration will work with us in making sure that those nominations have been properly vetted and that we have the confidence that all of the actions required prior to confirmation have been completed. We will continue to work with them as we have over the course of the last year. We have already reported and confirmed over 35 judges. I believe the number is now 38. We will have a lot more to confirm in the coming weeks and months. I thank in that regard Senator Leahy for his efforts and for his work. I know there was a colloquy and exchange in the Chamber over the course of the last hour with regard to judgeships and other issues. I thank him for his leadership and for the extraordinary effort he has been making. As I said at the beginning of this session, and at the beginning of last session, it is my policy, and it is the policy of our caucus, that once these matters have been brought to the floor on the Executive Calendar, they will get a vote. It may not be a direct vote, but it will be a vote. And we will continue to work with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ensure that these votes are scheduled in a timely way. We have also begun consideration of the economic stimulus bill. I wish we could have accomplished more in the short time that we had. We will be back on the bill on Tuesday. We will work all through the day on Tuesday. There will be votes on Tuesday, beginning perhaps as early as Tuesday morning. We will also be in session on Monday, even though there will be no votes on Monday. Because of the Republican retreat, there will be no votes on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of next week. The Democratic single, 1- day conference will take place on Wednesday. We will come back the following Monday, and Senators should expect votes on Monday of the following week. It is my hope that we can complete our work on the economic stimulus bill early in that week, the week after next. We have a lot of work to do. The economic stimulus package should be completed within the first couple of days, so we can move to the farm bill, election reform, and, of course, the energy bill. So in a very short period of time there is a great deal of work to be done. If necessary, I intend to file cloture on the economic stimulus bill in an effort to bring closure to our work on the bill. We have been debating it for weeks, one could say months in the last session of the Congress last year. There is no need to extend the debate in this case as well. We will have additional amendments. We will have additional votes. But at the end, we must conclude our work and move on one way or the other. As I have said in this Chamber on many occasions, what I view this legislation to be is nothing more, really, than a ticket to conference so we can continue to work and find some resolution. It would be ideal, of course, if the House would just take it up and pass it. That would be my first choice. But at the very least, it is a ticket to conference. It would be a good thing if we got to conference and began working out our differences in a way that would allow us to complete our work on the economic stimulus bill and, I might add, provide the unemployment benefits for 13 more weeks for millions of workers who are looking to us for some sign of hope that they are going to have the wherewithal to at least maintain their quality of life and their ability to buy groceries and pay their rent and pay their heating bills. So while this has not been as productive a week as I had hoped, we have ended it in a way that I think gives us some reason for additional confidence next week as we take up the bill, and certainly confidence with regard to the Executive Calendar and the nominations that will be confirmed this afternoon. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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, I appreciate the opportunity that we now have to revisit the question of economic stimulus. This was a contentious debate before we ended the First Session of the 107th Congress last December. Over the course of the last several weeks, of course, we have made an effort to try to find what I call ``common ground'' in an effort to expedite the consideration of economic stimulus and to move this process forward. I don't have a calendar in the Chamber at this point, but I remind my colleagues that we have very little time between now and the Founders' Day recess to do all of the work that Republicans and Democrats have indicated is important to both our agendas. Both caucuses have indicated a strong desire to deal with economic stimulus, a strong desire to deal with election reform, a strong desire to finish the farm bill, and, certainly, a strong desire to deal with energy. My hope is we could deal with all of those pieces of legislation prior to the Founders' Day recess. In order to do that, we have to maximize the use of every day. We have 2 days this week. We have only 2 days next week because of the Republican retreat. Then we have 2 weeks following that to complete our work on all of the bills I have just mentioned. In an effort to move the process along, I will propound a unanimous consent request within the hour to see if we might find an agreement on procedure on the economic stimulus bill. I would propose, as I suggested to Senator Lott yesterday, four amendments on a side. I am not wedded to that. If people have a desire to offer more amendments than that, we could do that. But we have to get this ball started. I am concerned, frankly, about reports I have received overnight that there are some on the Republican side who want to slow walk this bill, who don't want to bring it to closure, who, for whatever reason, have decided now that we are on this bill that they don't want to have a vote on final passage until perhaps 2 weeks from now. Keep in mind, we are not in session next Wednesday. Some have suggested that we should not have a vote on this bill until after the State of the Union Message--that is Tuesday night--which means we then wouldn't be able to complete our work until the following week. I know of all the cries and anger and the anguish expressed by some for the fact that we were not able to complete our work on the economic stimulus bill last December. How ironic it would be that some of those who have criticized the inability to come to some conclusion would now be responsible for delaying it even further. I hope that is not the case. I hope we can get an agreement that will allow us to reach some procedural conclusion so we can complete the substantive work on this bill prior to the end of the week. Let me briefly lay out exactly what it is we are suggesting. Two circles on this chart depict virtually all of the proposals that have been made by either Republican or Democratic Senators, and oftentimes Members of the House, with regard to economic stimulus. Democrats have proposed increasing unemployment benefits, adding unemployment compensation coverage for part-time workers and recent hires, and providing affordable group health coverage for the unemployed. The job creation tax credit for businesses was also something that we felt would go a long way to addressing the need to stimulate the economy from the business side. We also supported extending the unemployment benefits for 13 weeks, tax rebates for those who didn't get them the last time, the bonus depreciation that would accelerate the depreciation on investments in business, and then the fiscal relief for States. States are very concerned that bonus depreciation, in particular, is going to cost them about $5 billion. They are also concerned that the Medicaid costs are going up dramatically. So the fiscal relief for States is something that has been the subject of a number of very urgent letters to us from Republican and Democratic Governors alike. Our Republican colleagues suggested accelerating rate reductions, the repeal of the corporate AMT--the alternative, and health coverage for unemployed workers through individual insurance markets. They also suggested extending unemployment benefits. They suggested the tax rebates. They proposed bonus depreciation and fiscal relief for States. Several weeks ago we began considering, well, how can we move this bill forward? The suggestion was, let's just take the common elements in the two circles, the overlap you see here on this chart, and consider that as sort of the base proposal that might be used as a way to move the bill forward, while not denying Senators the right, of course, to offer other ideas, other suggestions, if the requisite 60 votes on points of order can be acquired. So that is really what is before the Senate right now. We have taken a House vehicle, the adoption tax credit, and we are amending the adoption tax credit procedurally with this proposal as a way in which to allow Senators to begin the debate on economic recovery. The CBO has provided a real service to us over the last couple of weeks, and I don't know if all of our colleagues had the opportunity to see it. If they have not, I urge them to take a look at it. But the CBO made an evaluation of the stimulative impact of all of the proposals I have just listed here in these circles. The stimulative impact, obviously, is a very significant factor, I believe, on what it is we decide we want to offer for economic stimulus. The payroll tax holiday offered by Senator Domenici is one of the provisions that had the biggest bang for the buck, according to the CBO. Of course, we suggested that that might be a component, but because there isn't agreement on it, unfortunately, it certainly doesn't fit into this common ground proposal at this point. I would have supported it. I still do. But that has a large bang for the buck. Additional tax rebates have a medium bang for the buck according to the CBO. We are proposing in this common ground proposal the tax rebate for those who didn't get any help the first time. Temporary investment incentives, such as the bonus depreciation --again, that is a medium bang for the buck--better than some, not as good as others. That is also in the common ground proposal. So you have two of the items in the common ground proposal, according to the CBO, that have a medium bang for the buck, medium stimulative value. Look at what the CBO said about accelerated rate cuts. They said it had a small bang for the buck, and a corporate AMT repeal falls into the small category, very little stimulative value. Now, this isn't a Democrat position, this isn't an analysis made by one of my staff; this is the Congressional Budget Office which has provided the analysis. So, again, if we want to do what we say we are doing here--provide some common ground on stimulative proposals that have the most effect-- according to the CBO, some of the proposals in here, such as tax rebates, bonus depreciation, go a long way. Let me address the unemployment benefits as well because that, too, is something I think we ought to say something about. The CBO didn't address that question, but the CRS did. The Congressional Research Service said: Extending unemployment compensation is, in fact, likely to be a more successful policy for stimulating aggregate demand than many other tax/transfer changes. Individuals who are unemployed and who are not or will not be receiving unemployment benefits are much more likely to spend additional incomes than, say, higher income individuals who receive tax cuts. That is in a memo provided by CRS to Senator Baucus last fall. Mr. President, I simply say again, if we are serious about moving this forward, let's take those proposals that analysts and economists have said have stimulative value. If we are serious about finding compromise, what could possibly be wrong with taking the proposals that both sides had in their initial proposal as a way with which to at least get to conference? This is a ticket to conference. Then we can have another debate about what ought to be in the bill. That is what we are doing here. I just hope our colleagues will recognize that and will recognize how limited a timeframe we have to address this issue and move this legislation forward. So I am asking my colleagues on the other side, let's come to some agreement on amendments procedurally, let's come to some agreement on amendments substantively, but let's come together. Time is wasting. I don't want to see this bill slow-walked, or see this legislation languish on the floor for days, when we can do this and move on to other things that need to be done sometime very soon. I thank the Chair and my colleagues. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, about an hour ago I noted that we have a lot of work to do in a very short period of time. We have talked jointly--Republicans and Democrats--about the need to do not only economic stimulus but the farm bill, the energy bill, and the election reform bill. We have 2 days this week. We have only 2 days next week. And then we have 2 weeks before the Founders' Day recess. I do not know how we can accommodate all of those unless we can move this legislation forward. We had lengthy debates about the economic stimulus bill for weeks in the remaining period prior to the end of the last session. I suggested to Senator Lott yesterday that perhaps one way we could expedite the consideration of this bill, without any time limits, is simply to get a limit on amendments. I have been told there are some on the Republican side who would rather not complete work on this bill perhaps not only not this week or next week but until the week after. I hope that is not the case. There is much to be done. As I said, I think there is mutual advantage to getting it done. So I indicated about an hour ago that I would propose a unanimous consent request that would simply recognize the facts I have just stated. I am not wedded to the particular amendment limit I have suggested in this unanimous consent request. I am going to be proposing we limit amendments on either side to four each. That would accommodate Senators on either side who may wish to add to this common ground package I have suggested. They can offer a substitute. They can do any one of a number of things. If four does not work, I am happy to entertain an alternative number. But we have to start with something. So that is my intention. Unanimous Consent Request Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that there be four first- degree amendments in order for each leader or their designees to the pending matter; that if the Senate passes H.R. 622, as amended, then the Senate immediately turn to the consideration of H.R. 3529, the House stimulus bill; that all after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of H.R. 622, as passed, be substituted in lieu thereof; the bill be read a third time and passed; the Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House, and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees.

Mr. DASCHLE. I thank the Senator from Minnesota. I will be brief. Let me just say, the whole purpose in this exercise is to find common ground. If this isn't the common ground, I am willing to entertain any amendment that might be viewed as better common ground. But we know that whatever common ground proposal we find has to attain at least a 60-vote threshold. We know the House-passed bill will not reach a 60-vote threshold. We know the Democratic proposal will not reach a 60-vote threshold. So simply to take up a bill that we know will fail does not get us any further along. The whole idea, as I said at the beginning, is to seek some compromise that would allow us a 60-vote threshold. So we are still waiting. We are still searching. We are still hoping we can offer amendments in the effort to accommodate that goal--a 60-vote threshold. So I appreciate the kind offer of the Senator from Oklahoma, but I think he knows, as I do, that isn't going to get us where we need to go if we are going to complete our work on this bill.

Mr. DASCHLE. Unfortunately, I was not in the Chamber when the Senator from Arizona made his remarks, so it would be difficult for me to comment specifically. But if that is the tenor of the comment made by the Senator, let me simply refer him to my opening remarks today which I made about an hour ago. I had a chart that showed, in a circle, the proposals made by the Republicans and, in a circle, the proposals made by the Democrats. There is an overlap of those two circles. The list of items in that overlapped part of the two circles is what we have before us. They are not word for word identically proposed. They are different. The concepts are different. I appreciate the senior Senator from Minnesota helping me with my visual aids, handing me this chart. On this chart is shown the common middle area which comprises several issues that are common to both Republican and Democratic proposals. We both have proposed unemployment benefits. We both have proposed tax rebates. We both have proposed bonus depreciation. We both have proposed fiscal relief for States.

Mr. DASCHLE. As I said, they are not identical, but the components are found in both bills. If that isn't the definition of ``compromise,'' I honestly do not know what is. All I am suggesting is, we take that as the base vehicle and use it as the subject for whatever amendments Senators wish to offer. So that is really the issue. The Senator from Minnesota has been very kind with his time. I appreciate him yielding to me.

Mr. DASCHLE. No. No. If the Senator will yield, let me make sure everyone understands the proposal. The proposal was that either caucus have a minimum of four amendments to offer in addition. So there would be amendments to the package proposed as the common ground vehicle.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I move to instruct the Sergeant at Arms to request the presence of absent Senators. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the start of a new session of Congress is always a hopeful time, and this session is no exception. These are days of great and important challenges for our Nation and for our world, which means we have the opportunity to do great and important work. It is an honor to be part of this Congress and to be able to work with so many fine men and women, Republicans and Democrats. I am going to have more to say this afternoon about the legislative agenda for the year. For now, let me welcome back my colleagues to this second session of Congress. Let me welcome our staffs and all of those who are associated with making this Senate work as it does each and every day. This is only the second time I have had the privilege of opening a session of Congress. The first time was a year ago during my first 17- day term as majority leader. In my remarks that day, I mentioned the Brumidi corridor, the incredible frescoes that line the walls on the first floor of this building. They were painted more than 125 years ago by an Italian immigrant named Constantino Brumidi. Some people refer to him as ``America's Michelangelo''--with good reason. He spent 25 years of his life painting the walls and the great dome of this Capitol. It was a labor of love for his adopted country. Over the years, Brumidi's magnificent paintings were covered over by layers of paint and varnish. For the last several years, art conservators have been painstakingly scraping away those layers to reveal the original works of art underneath. I have often thought of that process as a good metaphor for the Senate. Over the years, a layer of partisanship has sometimes settled over the Senate. Even with that disadvantage, it has remained the greatest legislative body in the history of the world and one in which I am very proud to serve. But it is when we are able to transcend the layers of partisanship, as we did last year in response to the attacks on our Nation, that the real beauty and genius of this institution are revealed. Very often, as I leave work at the end of the day, I walk down the Brumidi corridors on my way out the door. I take a quick look to see the progress the conservators have made. I remember one evening particularly well. It was late October. For much of the time since September 11, and since the anthrax letter was opened in my office, work on the corridors had stopped. But that evening, the conservators were back at work making progress. Their work, it seemed to me, was an act of faith that 125 years from now, and long after that, this building will still be standing; people will still come from all over America and all over the world to see the miracle of democracy in action. Mo Udall wrote a book called ``Too Funny to be President'' about his years in the Congress. He dedicated it to the 3,000 Members of Congress, living and dead, with whom he served for nearly three decades. As we begin this new session of Congress, let us remember that we are part of a continuum of all who have come before us and all who will come after us, and let us pledge to work in a way that will honor them all. With that, I wish my colleagues well. I welcome them back. I yield the floor. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DASCHLE

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I move to proceed to H.R. 622, and I ask unanimous consent that the pending farm bill not be displaced by the adoption of this motion.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I have an amendment at the desk and ask for its consideration.

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I express my appreciation to the distinguished Republican leader for this ongoing effort to try to get to this point. This is not what he would have subscribed to; this is not what I would have subscribed to necessarily. Basically what this does is provide us with an opportunity to move forward on an economic stimulus package. It is open to amendment. But what I have done with the amendment I have just offered to the bill, H.R. 622, which is the adoption tax credit bill that had been on the calendar, is simply provide an opportunity now for us to move forward. The amendment I have just offered is comprised of the four components I have been talking about on the floor and off the floor. The amendment includes, first, the bonus depreciation legislation, the tax rebate, the unemployment legislation, and the so-called FMAP, the resources provided to the States to help them offset the cost of Medicaid. Those four components are components in various forms, of course, that have been supported by Republicans and Democrats. It is the right of any Senator now to offer an amendment, whether it is the complete substitute that some might prefer or targeted amendments dealing with these four components or something else. My hope is, however, at some point in the not too distant future we can complete our work on this and go to conference so we can ultimately complete our work on a bill that enjoys both House and Senate support and hopefully the support of the President as well. That is, in essence, what we have done today. I appreciate the help and the cooperative effort that has been made by a number of our colleagues, not the least of whom is the Republican leader. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, if everybody will take their seats, we can quickly take the picture. (The VICE PRESIDENT assumed the chair.) (Thereupon, the official Senate photograph was taken.)

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, it has long been recognized that the Department of the Interior's Indian trust fund accounting and management systems have struggled with the challenge of meeting the Government's trust responsibility to Native Americans. Shortly before the Christmas break, to her credit, the Secretary of the Interior acknowledged this fact and proposed reorganizing the way the Department handles its trust asset management responsibilities. The Secretary has proposed creating a new Bureau of Indian Trust Asset Management to manage Indian trusts. It is now the job of the Department, Congress, and the tribes to assess how this plan would work in practice. Tribal leaders in South Dakota have emphasized to me their concern that any BIA reorganization plan that has not been thoroughly discussed with the Native American community nationwide could hold potentially adverse consequences for tribal members. The leaders of the nine tribes in my State, for example, ask how such a proposal would address the underlying issues of trust fund management in light of the pending Cobell vs. Norton class action suit; how it would impact funding for other programs upon which tribes depend; and how it would affect the self-governance of Tribes. These are legitimate questions, and tribal leaders and their members deserve satisfactory answers prior to the implementation of any reorganization plan. I hope that a more concerted effort will be made, by the Department and Congress, to involve tribal leaders fully in the decision-making process on the BIA reorganization effort. Certainly no significant organizational changes within the BIA should be made without adequate consultation with tribal leaders across the country. The essence of the Federal Government's trust relationship with the tribes requires no less.

Mr. DASCHLE

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Transportation, Infrastructure, and Nuclear Safety be authorized to meet on Wednesday, January 23, 2002, at 10 a.m. to conduct a hearing on issues related to reauthorization of the Price-Anderson provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as they apply to licenses of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The hearing will be held in SD- 406.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I came to this Chamber just as we opened the session to welcome back our colleagues and staff and all of those who are so much a part of this great institution. I reiterate that welcome again this afternoon. I am sure we all hope this new year and this new session will be constructive and productive. Much has happened in the weeks since we adjourned. In the war on terrorism, President Bush and his national security team continue to do a superb job. And our men and women in uniform continue to inspire us with their heroism and their success. Closer to home, workers in New York continue to clear away the wreckage at ground zero. At the Pentagon, rebuilding is already underway. In Princeton, NJ, a tiny 15-day-old baby girl--the daughter of Scott and Lisa Beamer--is living proof that the spirit of the heroes of United flight 93 will never die. And just yesterday--more than 3 months after the largest bioterrorism attack in our Nation's history forced it shut--the Hart Senate Office Building finally reopened. Those are all reasons to be hopeful about this new year. But there are also reasons to be concerned. In all, there are now more than 8.3 million Americans who want to work but do not have jobs. The collapse of Enron has cost thousands of Enron employees their jobs--and their retirement savings. Tens of thousands of other Americans who have invested part of their retirement savings in pension funds have also been hurt by Enron's implosion. In South Dakota and all across America, people are working hard to raise their children, pay their bills, and maybe, if they are lucky, to put something away for the future. Our job this year is to help them, by strengthening our national security, our economic security, and the security of our democratic institutions. As we begin this new session, we face two significant challenges. The first is fiscal. Last year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the Federal Government would run a $5.6 trillion surplus over the next decade. This morning the CBO released new reports showing that $4 trillion of the projected surplus has disappeared in the space of just 7 months. Instead of surpluses every year from now until 2011, current projections indicate that even if you include the Social Security and Medicare surpluses, the Government will run deficits at least in the years 2002 and 2003. And it will be forced to use $1.2 trillion in Social Security and Medicare trust funds over the next decade to pay for other essential Government programs. That is before we add one penny for the Medicare prescription drug benefit or strengthen our military or increase our investments in homeland security, education, or other critical priorities. It is also before we add one penny for an economic recovery package. The second challenge we face is ideological. There are some who predict we will accomplish little this year because of our genuine differences in philosophy on many issues and because this session is so short and the stakes in the November elections are so high. But we do not have to accept that prediction. Important issues do not have to be insoluble. The new education bill we passed last year is proof of that. Six days from today President Bush will deliver his first State of the Union Address. Six days after that, he will send the Congress his budget proposal. Democrats will give the President's proposals very careful and respectful consideration. He deserves every aspect of respect and care that we can give his budget. Today I would like to say a few words about what we see as our priorities for the coming year. And I might say that we look forward to working with the President and with our Republican colleagues to find principled compromises on each of them. The first thing we need to do is finish our work from last year. We should start by passing an economic recovery plan that will create jobs and get America's economy moving in the right direction again. Both the Democratic and Republican economic recovery plans are more than 75 percent tax cuts. Over the holidays, the Congressional Budget Office analyzed all of the major economic recovery proposals and indicated that the least helpful would be repealing the corporate alternative minimum tax and speeding up the income tax rate reductions passed last summer. Earlier this month, in an effort to get the negotiations moving again, I proposed two new business tax cuts for every company in America that creates new jobs or invests in new equipment and technology. But today, I offer another proposal for breaking the impasse. There are four ideas that appear in every major economic plan-- Democratic and Republican. The first is to extend unemployment benefits by 13 weeks. Republicans and Democrats have suggested that. The second is to provide tax rebates for workers who did not get a rebate the first time. Again, both Republicans and Democrats have offered that. The third is to provide bonus depreciation to encourage business investment. Again, both groups have proposed that. And finally, the fourth is to provide fiscal relief for States to help them avoid cutting critical services--especially health care--or raising taxes during the recession. I hope we can at least take up these four measures immediately. If there are others for which there can be agreement--perhaps New York assistance, perhaps the extenders, perhaps other issues--where we can find common ground, I would like to be able to do that. I hope we can do it this week. I have begun talking with Senator Lott, and he has been extremely responsive in his desire to try to find a way to move this legislation along. I commend him and thank him for that. Later on this afternoon we will offer a unanimous consent request that will accommodate Senators' wishes to offer amendments but also, I hope, Senators' desires to get something done. So I am hopeful we can accomplish that this week. I might add, we have a very limited period of time. We have a couple of days this week. And because of agreed-to schedules, we only have a couple of days next week. And then we have just 2 weeks after that before the Founders' Day recess. In that period of time it would be my hope we could do the economic recovery, the election reform, the farm bill, and an energy bill as well. That is a lot to do, but if we can make every day count--beginning with this one--I think we can do it. I am hopeful Republicans and Democrats can work together to ensure that happens. As I said, we also need to finish the farm bill. We do not need another year or another month to know we have to build on what has been done already. Since the Freedom to Farm bill was passed in 1996, farm income has dropped 25 percent. USDA now warns that unless we pass a new farm bill or more emergency assistance quickly, farm income could drop another 20 percent this year alone. The farm bill is economic recovery for rural America. So we ask that we can work together again on this legislation. Let's work to pass it immediately. Let's go to conference. Let's resolve our differences. And let's get this legislation on the President's desk. As I noted, the President shares the view that Republicans and Democrats have advocated with regard to energy. We need a national energy plan. The administration has proposed a plan which relies a good deal on adding to production. Their view is that we drill on certain sensitive lands on which I personally have some objection. The House- passed version of that plan would add $34 billion in tax relief for energy companies. What Democrats would do is have a balance between the need for new production and what we ought to do with conservation and with alternative energy development. Let's reduce America's dependence on not just foreign oil but on oil, period. That ought to be part of the debate we have on energy. There is a lot of work to be done in a very short period of time. I hope we can do all of that in the time we have allotted for these very important bills. We also need to pass terrorism reinsurance. Efforts to solve this complex problem last year were impeded by some who sought to use this issue to push other extraneous issues. This year we will need to work together to assess the real needs of the marketplace and provide real solutions--the sooner, the better. Our second responsibility is to continue to lay the foundation for long-term economic growth. An essential part of that foundation is expanded trade. Last month, the Finance Committee passed a bill that gives the President expanded trade promotion authority and addresses important labor and environmental issues related to trade. The committee also passed a bill to expand trade adjustment assistance, including assistance for farmers who are displaced by global trade. Early this year we will bring to the Senate floor a fast-track bill that includes both of these essential components, and I hope we will pass it with broad bipartisan support. Expanded trade was a key factor in the economic boom of the 1990s. Other key factors were fiscal discipline and increased productivity made possible by advances in technology. To keep America's technological edge, we should take final action on the Export Administration Act this year. We should expand broadband Internet access and work to make it universal, the same as telephone service, this year. We should find a way to make R&D tax credits permanent this year, and we should build on the bipartisan success of our new education bill passed last year by expanding opportunities to go to college or attend a training program and by working toward full funding of the Individuals with Disabilities Act so that children with disabilities can develop their skills to the fullest potential. After all, the minds of our young people are our best hope for long-term economic growth. Our third responsibility is to increase families' economic security. We should raise the minimum wage $1.50 an hour over 2 years so people who work full time don't have to live in poverty. In 1996, we changed welfare programs to say if you are able-bodied, you should work. Since then we have seen dramatic decreases in the State caseloads and increases in the number of people moving from welfare to work. For too many families, however, moving off welfare has not meant moving out of poverty. We need to strengthen welfare reform this year and make sure people who move from welfare to work have access to affordable child care, transportation, and health care so they can actually make a better life for themselves and their children. We need to expand affordable health coverage to uninsured Americans. We need to pass a real, enforceable Patients' Bill of Rights. Insurers should not be able to deny medical care once you get sick, and certainly they should not be able to deny care or coverage based on the results of genetic tests that indicate you might get sick someday. President Bush says he opposes genetic discrimination. We hope to work with him this year to prohibit both employers and insurers from using genetic test results as a basis for discrimination and to prevent disclosure of genetic information to banks, employers, and anyone else who has no legitimate need for information. The collapse of Enron has left thousands of former Enron employees suddenly fearful of growing old in poverty. For every Enron worker, there are tens of thousands of workers in other companies who worry that they could share the same fate. We have a responsibility to look at everything from Federal rules governing 401(k) pension plans to corporate disclosure requirements under securities laws, to accounting reforms and whether the accounting industry's self-regulatory system is sufficient. We need to learn what happened and then work together to prevent it from ever happening again. We must also work together this year to protect, not privatize, America's public retirement system, Social Security, and Medicare, and to add real prescription drug coverage to Medicare. Half measures such as voluntary discount cards that just push the costs off on pharmacists and provide little savings to seniors are simply not adequate. Our fourth responsibility is to strengthen homeland security. On September 11 and when the anthrax letter was opened in my office, we saw how devastating it can be when terrorists are able to slip through the holes in our homeland security. We need to work in a bipartisan manner to close those holes as quickly as possible. We were puzzled during the debate on economic recovery when some insisted that strengthening our homeland defense was not an emergency. We are pleased by new reports that indicate the administration has now decided to devote real attention and resources to homeland security, and we will certainly work with them to do so. Our fifth responsibility is to strengthen the security of our basic democratic rights and institutions. That includes the right of every American to vote and have that vote count. A year ago, we had just come through the most difficult Presidential election in our lifetimes. Since then, Senators Dodd, McConnell, Bond, Schumer, and Torricelli have come up with a bipartisan plan to strengthen our election system. I intend to bring their bill up as soon as possible. The American people are asking--fairly, I believe--whether our campaign system is part of the reason Enron was able to do what it did. Whether that is true or not, the mere suspicion that it might be true is damaging to our democracy. House supporters need only three more signatures on a discharge petition to bring the Shays-Meehan bill to the floor. I expect they will get those votes and pass a good, comprehensive campaign finance reform bill this year. We must change the system now. One of the heroes who defied the hijackers on flight 93 was Mark Bingman, a gay man. His courage may have helped save this very building. This year we should have the courage to pass ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and prohibit employers from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation. We must also pass the bipartisan bill expanding the Federal hate crimes law to include gender, sexual orientation, and disability, and to provide greater protections against crimes motivated by racial and religious bias. Scott Beamer will always be remembered for those final brave words: ``Let's roll.'' His new daughter Morgan, born just 15 days ago, is probably the best known of the babies born to fathers who died in the September 11 terrorist attacks. But she is not the only one. So far there are 17 such babies, including a pair of twins. By summer there will be 40 more babies born to fathers who died in the September 11 attacks. Every day in America, 11,000 babies are born. Last year was one of the saddest in our Nation's life. As we begin this new session, with its new challenges and new opportunities, let us remember those who died on September 11. But let us also remember the children they left behind, some of whom they never even had the chance to see or hold. Let us also remember the other children who are depending on us to pass on to them an America that is filled with as much hope, freedom, and possibility as the Nation we inherited from our own parents. Let us resolve together to find a way to meet the most important of all of our responsibilities. I am confident that we can. I look forward to working with our Republican leader, as I have always done at the outset of a new session of Congress. This year is certainly one of those years again. I thank my colleagues and yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record, with no intervening action.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I now call up H. Con. Res. 295, the adjournment resolution. I ask that the Senate vote on adoption of the concurrent resolution, with no intervention action or debate.