Tom Daschle

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I thank the Senator from Illinois. His comments make my point. He is not only knowledgeable and articulate on the issue, but he has certainly persisted in ensuring that this piece of legislation be considered along with many others. Madam President, there are several key areas the Democratic caucus-- and it goes to the point raised by the Senator from Illinois--will be advocating. First and foremost, I want to emphasize again because I feel the need every time we talk about economic stimulus to ensure that people understand our real priority. Our priority, first and foremost, is to help the 7.5, now almost 8 million workers who are unemployed. In the last recession, we extended employment benefits four times. We have to consider the fact that those weeks are running out now, for those who are eligible for unemployment assistance, and we have to extend it again this time. But we also have to understand that 54 percent of those who are unemployed today are not entitled to unemployment benefits, so we have to broaden eligibility. That is certainly going to be a key area for us as we attempt to negotiate some successful solution. I would say as well that none of them can afford health benefits. When you are given a few hundred dollars a month in unemployment, it is almost impossible--after you have paid the rent, after you have paid for the groceries and the heating bills and other necessities of the family--to buy health insurance. We have to assist these unemployed workers to pay for their health care during the time they are unemployed as well. That would be a priority for us. We also will try to ensure that the issue of rebates is addressed for those who pay a lot of payroll tax but were not entitled to an income- tax rebate last year. That ought to be on the table, and we will be talking about that. Business tax relief is also something we care a lot about. The expensing for small business is something for which we are going to fight. We are also going to try to assure additional depreciation for all businesses. The high-tech community said that is one of the most important issues for them. That will be a priority for us. We have a number of very key issues we hope to present to our House colleagues. But I also remind all of my colleagues that whatever we do on the finance side--whatever we do on the revenue side--is only half of our interest. There is an economic stimulus involved here. It is our interest to pass homeland security as well--Senator Byrd and I have been meeting all day long--as we consider the Byrd amendment to ensure that homeland security is part of economic stimulus as we take up the Defense appropriations bill early next week. Just as soon as that bill comes over to the Senate, we will take it up in committee. Senator Byrd will be offering his amendment on homeland security. It is my hope we can get a bipartisan vote on that as well. Nothing will stimulate this economy faster than raising people's confidence about their own security. Nothing will help them more in that regard than if we increase law enforcement assistance and provide ways in which to ensure, on bioterrorism and all the other potential possibilities for attacks to our national security, we are more prepared than we are today. That, too, is economic stimulus. That, too, is part of our plan. But that will be running on a separate track. I want to emphasize how critical we think that piece is, and how important it is to our long- term resolution. They have to go hand in glove. They are going to run in tandem. We are going to be taking both of these sequentially, and both are important to us. I make that point, as we have made it before on the Senate floor. I appreciate very much the interest of all Senators.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, we have just completed our caucus. I know the Republicans were caucusing. I am not sure whether they have completed or not. I want to report to the Senate about our current circumstances and what the schedule might be for the remainder of the week. Senator Lott and I have been discussing the current schedule and our circumstances involving the railroad retirement bill. My hope is that we can move to proceed to the bill sometime within the next hour. If that is the case, it is my intention to file cloture on the bill at some point this evening. It is also my intention that we seek unanimous consent to vote on cloture on Monday. We will not be in session on Saturday, but we will be on Monday. We will also entertain amendments. It is my understanding that Senator Lott may be recognized to offer an amendment, and we will have a debate on that amendment tomorrow and on Monday. My expectation is that there will not be any votes tonight or tomorrow but that we will have votes on Monday at approximately 5 o'clock. Senator Murray reports to me that the Transportation conference report has now been completed, and it is my hope that we can vote on the Transportation conference report perhaps as early as Monday. If not Monday, then on Tuesday. My hope is that if we can achieve cloture on the railroad retirement bill on Monday, we can bring debate on the bill to a close by Wednesday. It is then my intention, as I have said on several occasions, to make a motion to proceed to the farm bill. That is a must-pass piece of legislation. It is my hope and expectation that we can complete our work on that, maybe even as early as the end of next week. I also note that we have made the decision over the course of the last few hours, and in consultation with Senator Lott as well as our caucus, that we will be in session and voting the week of December 10. That has been an open question until now. But we have now made that decision. Our expectation is we will be voting every day the week after next. Senators ought to be on hand and prepared to vote all week. Of course, it may be that we will have to vote and be in session the week after that. But clearly, for the next 2 weeks the Senate will be in session and Senators need to be prepared to be on the floor and voting, to accommodate the remaining schedule we have for the remainder of this session of Congress. I also presented to the caucus what amounts to an informal agreement on how we will proceed on the economic stimulus bill. I am pleased to report that our caucus has agreed with the proposal that has been presented to me by the Speaker, as we consider how to proceed on the economic stimulus bill. If we can reach a procedural agreement tonight, it is my expectation we can move to substantive negotiations on the economic stimulus bill tomorrow morning. It is my hope we can work on it through the weekend, if that is possible, in order to try to expedite our work on that bill and our efforts to reach some final agreement early next week. The procedural agreement would call for consideration of the Senate Finance Committee bill, the House-passed economic stimulus bill, and other issues relating to those two bills. We do not exclusively limit our consideration of economic stimulus to those two vehicles. There are a lot of other issues out there. Senator Durbin in particular has expressed to the caucus on numerous occasions, and here on the floor, how important it is that we consider a payroll tax holiday. That is an issue I have indicated I am particularly interested in and intrigued with. I don't know whether or not we have the ability to work it into the agreement. I know Senator Domenici has expressed an interest in the proposal, and Senator Lott has noted his support for the proposal. On our side, I don't think there has been any more ardent a supporter, any more articulate an advocate of the so-called payroll tax holiday than the distinguished senior Senator from Illinois. I applaud him and appreciate his tutorial to the caucus on the issue. He has been able to bring us to a better understanding of how it would work. I must say I am indebted to him for all of his work in advocating that particular issue. But my point is that that, along with other vehicles, is going to be considered as we debate the issue in the hope that we can bring some resolution to our negotiations sometime early next week. I see the Senator standing. I am happy to yield to him. (Ms. STABENOW assumed the Chair.)

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, the Senator is absolutely correct. I have noted on several occasions my intention to move to the farm bill just as soon as we complete our work on the railroad retirement bill. It can be next Monday or Tuesday. It can be whenever we finish. But we will move to that bill next. We have to move to it. These are must-pass pieces of legislation that have to be done. We can take them in any order. But it is my intention to follow through with the order that I have already announced, which is to complete our work on the farm bill next. We will have the Defense appropriations bill, the stimulus bill, and the terrorist insurance bill. All of those have to be addressed. But as I noted--I see the chairman of the Agriculture Committee in the Chamber--the farm bill will be the next bill after the railroad retirement bill.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the recess be postponed until 1 o'clock.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, 5 months ago, America had a projected budget surplus of $2.7 trillion over the next 10 years. The stock market was soaring. The question before us was one that most leaders could only dream of: ``What should be we with out prosperity?'' At that time, we came to this floor to debate our Nation's fiscal future--how could we sustain that hard-won prosperity, meet our great unmet needs, and, yes, provide meaningful tax relief for millions of American families. Democrats put forward a balanced plan that maintained our fiscal discipline, while at the same time making sound investments in our children, our health, and our security, and provide tax relief. Because we recognized how fragile and inaccurate budget projections are, we left room to deal with an economic downturn or an unforeseen emergency. Unfortunately, our approach was not the one that prevailed. Instead of a balanced and fiscally responsible plan, we ended up with one so top-heavy with tax cuts, it left little room for other investments, and no flexibility for a change in circumstances. I made no secret of the fact that I was unhappy with that debate, and its outcome. But based on the administration's predictions--and assurances--that we could afford such cuts without running into deficits or shortchanging our priorities, the majority of my colleagues voted for it. Early this morning, just several months after receiving those assurances, and several months into the administration's 10-year plan, we now learn that the White House budget director is predicting that our government is likely to run budget deficits until 2005. This is a stark reversal from the situation this administration inherited less than a year ago. This is a marked departure from the rosy predictions we were being offered just months ago. So, how did this happen? Let's start with how it did not happen. As deeply as the September 11 attacks impact our lives, our security, and our economy--they are not responsible for the fiscal situation in which we now find ourselves. While the attacks of September 11 seemed to change everything in a moment, the economic trends before September 11 were clear. As a panel of economists announced earlier this week, our economy had officially entered a recession in March. Neither does our current situation have to do with congressional spending. We have not spent a dollar more than what the President and the Congress agreed to, either in the course of the normal appropriations process, or in response to the events of September 11--not a dollar. Although we have taken a great deal of action in the aftermath of these attacks--supporting the President's use of force in Afghanistan, keeping the airlines solvent, giving law enforcement additional tools to combat terrorism, and strengthening airport security--to date, we have actually spent less than $40 billion. So why are we now facing deficits when just months ago we were looking at years of surpluses? Regrettably, what we feared then is what we are faced with now. The economic plan that was passed ate up nearly two-thirds of what was an optimistic prediction of our 10-year surplus. It left no room for an economic slowdown, or an unanticipated emergency. As Robert Reischauer, the former Director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said: Had we not had the tax cut, it's likely that we would have skated along with close to a balanced budget, despite the costs of the war and the effort to contain terrorism. Even more ominously, the administration warned that decisions about taxes and spending in the next year ``will determine whether we ever see another surplus.'' Despite the fact that some of us did not approve of the plan that got us here, all of us should now work together to make sure that we pass an economic recovery plan that helps--rather than exacerbates--the problem. As we consider a package to stimulate the economy, we need to be extremely careful to pursue a policy that is temporary, truly stimulative, and--now more than ever--fiscally responsible. As I look at the Republican proposals, I am disappointed to see that they are based on tax cuts that fail these simple yet essential tests, and they do little or nothing for the dislocated workers who most need our help. In the weeks since September 11, Democrats and Republicans have been able to work together in a way that I haven't seen in all my time in Washington. Our ability to speak together and work together is one of the reasons, I believe, we have been able do so much, so quickly, in response to the attacks and the continuing terrorist threat. The fiscal outlook we are now facing is as serious as anything we have faced to date. We need to renew that same spirit, if we are to address this problem as well. Right now, we have an opportunity to help those who are hurting, and lift our economy in the process. It is an opportunity we cannot afford to lose. I appreciate the opportunity to come to the floor because I do fear with these economic projections--we have said on several occasions we knew the real possibility existed--that we will revert right back to the bad old days of deficits and huge new debt. I never dreamed it would be this soon. I never dreamed we would be talking in the third quarter--now the fourth quarter of this calendar year and the first quarter of the new fiscal year--that we would have deficits well into the third year beyond this year. That ought to be as strong an indication as we ever need that what we did last spring was a mistake; that what we did in economic policy with the passage of that tax cut was a disaster, not only for our economy but for our ability now to respond to the array of challenges we face in the aftermath of the crisis of September 11. How sad it is that the legacy of the last 8 years did not last longer than a few months. I am very hopeful we will take to heart the admonition of the Budget Committee chairman who has asked every Member of our Senate body to look very carefully at the report made by the OMB Director, to look at it with the recognition that, as we face these other additional challenges, whether it is the economic stimulus plan or the array of other challenges we face as we meet the needs of our current situation in fighting terrorism, that we do so prudently and with the recognition that a major mistake was made last spring. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the recess be postponed for 10 minutes, and that the Senate stand in recess following my remarks.

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

Mr. DASCHLE

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment.

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. DASCHLE. That is correct. The Senator is right. I appreciate his reminding me. If the Senate has been presented with the papers on the Transportation conference report by Monday, it is our intention to have a vote on the Transportation conference report as well. I am told the House is planning to act tomorrow. I know there has been a little bit of a debate. I don't know if that has been resolved. But if the papers arrive, it is our intent--and I had announced it earlier--to bring up the conference report on Transportation as well. I yield the floor.

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

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

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

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, just for explanation to all Senators, we have now moved to proceed to the railroad retirement bill. The distinguished Republican leader has offered an amendment for which there will be a cloture vote at 5 o'clock on Monday. Following that vote on cloture, there will be a vote on cloture on the bill at approximately 5:30 on Monday as well. So under the current arrangement, there will be two votes on Monday at about 5 o'clock. There will be, hopefully, a very good debate tomorrow on the Lott amendment. There can be debate tonight on the amendment or on the bill. But I hope Senators will use the time that is now allotted for the debate to express themselves and to participate in whatever debate may be required. But those cloture votes will occur at 5 o'clock. And there will be no other votes until that time.

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

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I wanted to come to the floor for a moment because I feel the need to talk about a lot of unfinished business, as we consider what remains for the balance of the time we have here. We will be going into our caucus shortly. This morning, prior to the opening of our session, I held my daily news conference and made mention of the fact that among those issues that are of greatest importance to us is the issue of election reform. I don't know of another bill that is pending in this Congress that has the unanimous support of our caucus. It is rare that one ever sees all of the members of our Caucus--51 in this case--as cosponsors of a bill. But election reform has that distinction. All 51 of our caucus members have endorsed the bill introduced by Senator Dodd earlier this year. The reason that they have endorsed that bill unanimously is because of the extraordinary degree of concern that exists within our caucus about the need for election reform as quickly as possible. Because of the tragedy of September 11, and the crisis of being at war, we haven't had the opportunity to focus on the many, many problems associated with the last presidential election--not just in Florida, but across the country. The studies and the reports that have been issued have made the problems quite clear: outdated and unreliable technology, confusing ballots, language barriers, lack of voter education, lack of poll worker training, and inaccurate voting lists that prevented legitimately registered voters from casting ballots. All of those concerns were of such gravity and magnitude that 6 million voters across the country were disenfranchised. So it probably should not surprise anybody that almost immediately following the beginning of this session of Congress, Senator Dodd went to work as chairman of the Rules Committee. He worked with Members on both sides of the aisle in both the House and the Senate to try to respond to the growing awareness of how serious the situation really is: how problematic, how incredibly unfair, how undemocratic were the results reflected in the degree of difficulty with our election processes--while we should proclaim our democracy with each and every election. So as a result of just a tremendous amount of work, Senator Dodd and members of the Rules Committee produced a bill that, as I said, generated 51 cosponsors. I simply wanted to come to the floor this afternoon to say this: If between now and the end of this session, Senator Dodd is able to reach an agreement with our Republican colleagues on a bill that we can bring to the floor to address all of these issues, these serious concerns, it is my intention to bring it to the floor. If somehow that is not possible and the negotiations continue, and we are able to reach an agreement prior to the next session of Congress, one of the very first pieces of legislation I expect to bring up will be election reform. If at any time during the coming year that agreement can be reached, my intention will be to bring the agreement to the Senate floor very quickly. But I will say this: Even absent an agreement, we will come to the floor and we will have a debate about election reform. We will make a comprehensive proposal to deal with this issue. We have no choice. It will be part of the agenda of the second session of the 107th Congress. I simply wanted to come to the floor to emphasize that and relate my concern, and the concern of a lot of members of our caucus, about the importance of this issue, and reiterate our determination to deal with it in this Congress. We cannot simply sit idly by and watch 6 million people--maybe more next time--as they are disenfranchised when they attempt to exercise their constitutional right to vote and participate in our political process. I appreciate the attention of my colleagues on this issue, and I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, we are out of time under the unanimous consent agreement. I ask unanimous consent that we not enter into recess until we have accommodated the remarks of the Senator from New York and the Senator from Idaho.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader may turn to the consideration of H.R. 3090 with the consent of the Republican leader.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I will use my leader time to make a couple of comments. First, I again thank the assistant Democratic leader, and my colleague from Illinois, and other Senators who participated in the colloquy this morning. I am disappointed that somebody would suggest we are wasting time when it is, of course, the fact that our Republican colleagues have chosen to filibuster the railroad retirement bill. We could have had a vote on it with amendments related to it yesterday and today. Because we were forced to file cloture on a motion to proceed, we are not able to bring up the railroad retirement bill. Therefore, we have to wait until tomorrow for us to have the opportunity to vote just to be able to take up the Railroad Retirement Act. It is disappointing. I hoped that somehow we could have reached some accommodation schedule-wise. So far, that has not been possible on railroad retirement. Senator Lott and I have been discussing matters relating to the economic security package over the last couple of days. We had a very good meeting again this morning with the President and the Speaker and the Democratic leader in the House. I offered a proposal at that time on which we have been working since that breakfast. Basically, the proposal could only be made as a result of tremendous work done by our chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Byrd. Senator Byrd has made the decision to offer his piece, the homeland security piece of our economic stimulus package, to the Defense appropriations bill in the Committee on Appropriations, and that will occur, of course, just as soon as the House sends us the Defense appropriations bill. It has not been sent over yet. It is my understanding that they may actually send it over today or tomorrow. That will then give us an opportunity to consider the Defense appropriations bill. At that time, it is Senator Byrd's intention to offer homeland security to the Defense appropriations bill. It is also my understanding that he will pare back the overall cost of the proposal in an effort further to reach consensus and compromise. I don't know how Senator Byrd can go much further than he has. We have now divorced it from the revenue package offered on the Senate floor. He has pared it back substantially from what it was originally. He has now suggested using it as an amendment to another vehicle so that we can move forward on the economic security piece proposed to us by the Senate Finance Committee. Those are three very critical steps. I hope our Republican colleagues might reciprocate in working with us now on the homeland security piece as well. What that does do is allow us now to work in concert with our Republican colleagues, both in the Senate as well as in the House, to arrive at perhaps an agreement, a compromise on the non-homeland- security-related part of our economic stimulus package. I have called a meeting for this evening at 6:30. I have just now spoken to both the Republican leader in the Senate and the Speaker. My staff and others have talked to Senator Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee, and to Congressman Gephardt. We will hope tonight to sit down and begin the deliberations that might allow us some way to break the impasse that has existed for a couple of weeks. It is my sincere hope we can do that. I urge my colleagues to work in good faith to arrive at a consensus sometime this week so we can complete our work on the economic stimulus bill next week. I yield to the Senator from Illinois.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I had intended to make a unanimous consent request, but at the request of the Republican leader, I will withhold that at this time. We have 7 business days left before the hopeful deadline we have attempted to impose upon ourselves. I say ``hopeful'' because there are so many outstanding questions that it may simply be impossible to complete our work by a week this coming Friday. I noted yesterday my intent was that we would be in conferences after that and come back for whatever votes on conference reports would be required, subject to notification of all Senators. But that would require two things. First, it is going to require we maximize the use of every day between now and next Friday, a week from this coming Friday. Secondly, it is important to have as much cooperation as possible. In order for that to occur, we have to make use of every day. We can't simply wait around for an economic stimulus package, or a conference report, or whatever else we may find the need to address prior to the time we finish our work in this session of Congress. So it will be my intention to ask unanimous consent that the economic stimulus package be the pending issue, subject to our ability to bring up other bills as we wait for our negotiated agreement on the economic stimulus package. Right now, of course, we have the railroad retirement bill pending. I would like to take up the farm bill. There will be the terrorism insurance bill that we will have to take up. We will have nominations to take up. That doesn't mean we displace the economic stimulus package or lessen in any way its priority. What it simply means is that, to the maximum degree possible, we are going to use every hour of the days remaining so we can accommodate this maybe-too-idealistic goal we have for completing our work. I will make that request, but I certainly will accommodate all Senators before I make it. I will return to the floor this afternoon at a time that Senator Lott and I can agree upon. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. I will be brief I know my colleagues may wish to speak on this issue. This bill passed with an overwhelming 384 votes in the House. There is very, very strong bipartisan support in the Senate; 74 of our colleagues have cosponsored the bill, including a majority in both the Democratic and Republican caucuses. All the rail unions are united behind this bill, and it is supported by the entire railroad industry. It represents the first time in 25 years that labor, management and retirees have agreed on a set of changes to the system. The reason is pretty simple. Most Members recognize we want to give railroad retirees the same opportunity as other retirees in the private sector, the opportunity to maximize their investment opportunities for retirement purposes. This bill would simply give them as many different options as we already provide to others in the private sector. As a result of increased returns from these investments, it would provide enhanced benefits for railroad retirees and reduce retirement taxes for railroad companies. Among other things, it would expand benefits for surviving spouses, provide a retiree health insurance plan and reduce the vesting requirement to five years. These are important changes that should be made. Enactment of this bill is long overdue. It is a good bill. It deserves our support. I am disappointed we are not able to move to it this afternoon. I will schedule a cloture vote on Thursday. We will do all we can to ensure that the legislation is considered and passed. It deserves our support, as it was given support in the House. We will do all we can to see that happens. I yield the floor.

Mr. DASCHLE

Mr. DASCHLE. It is not only a contradiction, it is a sad irony that somehow in the name of economic security we can, according to their approach, pay a company $1 billion-plus, but we can't find a way to pay for $1 billion in bioterrorism and food safety. We can't afford that. But we can afford $1 billion retroactive payments to some of the largest corporations in the country. How ironic. How incredibly misguided that is. Yet that is the debate.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator for a question.