Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Regular order brings back the Dorgan amendment, so I call for the regular order.

Mr. DOLE. I think the order is, after this, we go back to the Senator from North Dakota. If you do not have any objection, the Senator from Illinois would like to at least be heard on his amendment.

Mr. DOLE. If the Senator will yield, we can have the vote on the Dorgan amendment and work this out during the vote.

Mr. DOLE. I will just say, what we are trying to do is finish the bill. All these amendments would fall if cloture is invoked. We could go out and have the cloture vote at 9:30 in the morning. I am not certain cloture would be invoked. I think there has been some agreement. We heard the Conrad amendment, the Lieberman second-degree amendment, some agreement on the Simon amendment. As far as I am concerned, it is up to the managers. I think they are prepared to vote on all three. I do not know what order.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I support the goals of the amendments offered by my distinguished colleagues, Senator Conard and Senator Lieberman. Both Senators are absolutely right to criticize the television industry for programming that too often glorifies mindless violence and casual sex. One recent study commissioned by USA Weekend magazine recorded 370 instances of ``crude language or sexual situations'' during a 5-night period of prime-time programming, or 1 every 8.9 minutes; 208 of these incidents occurred between 8 and 9 p.m., the so- called family hour. According to one study, children will have been exposed to nearly 18,000 televised murders and 800 televised suicides by the time they reach the ripe old age of 18. Clearly, on the issue of violent and sexually oriented programming, the television industry has much, much to explain to concerned parents throughout the country. So, Mr. President, Senator Conard, Senator Lieberman, and I are in total agreement when it comes to identifying the problem that his amendment seeks to address. We part ways, however, when it comes to how best to resolve this problem in a way that is both effective and consistent with our free- speech traditions. Senator Conrad's amendment, as modified by the Lieberman second- degree, may not amount to censorship, but by establishing a 5-member Presidential Commission to create a ``violence rating system,'' it takes us one step closer to government control over what we see and hear on television. As I have said on numerous occasions, we have more to lose than to gain from putting Washington in charge of our culture. I am also concerned about the provisions in Senator Conrad's amendment that would direct TV stations to transmit the ratings developed by the Presidentially appointed Commission as well as require that all TV sets be equipped with chip technology in order to block out programming found objectionable under the government-rating system. These provisions are inconsistent with the general deregulatory approach of this bill--that less government control, less government regulations are what is needed most for a strong, competitive, consumer-oriented telecommunications industry. The real solution to the problem of television's corrosive impact on our culture lies with concerned parents, informed consumers who have the good sense to turn off the trash, and corporate executives within the entertainment industry who are willing to put common decency above corporate profits. That is why I have cosponsored the sense of the Senate amendment offered by my distinguished colleague from Illinois, Senator Simon. This amendment is right-on-target: It states that ``self-regulation by the private sector is * * * preferable to direct regulation by the Federal Government.'' And it urges the entertainment industry ``to do everything possible'' to limit the amount of violent and aggressive programming, particularly during the hours when children are most likely to be watching. In other words: No regulation. No government involvement. No censorship. Just focusing the moral spotlight where it is needed most. Mr. President, the television industry has tremendous power. In fact, television is perhaps the most dominant cultural force in America today. But with this power comes responsibility. It is my hope, and it is the hope of millions of Americans across this great country, that the television industry will finally get the message and preform a much-needed and urgent house-cleaning. Let me also add that when I made a statement about the entertainment industry a couple of weeks ago it did get the attention of a lot of people. But I notice in all the surveys that followed that speech there were about as many people concerned about Government censorship as there were about the violence, the mindless violence, and casual sex in movies and TV. I have been criticized, maybe with some justification, by some who say, ``Bob Dole, Senator Dole, wants censorship.'' I never suggested censorship. I did not suggest the Government do anything. I suggested that shame is a powerful weapon, and that it ought to be used. I also suggested that, while the entertainment industry has its first amendment rights, we have our first amendment rights to express outrage, as the Senator from Illinois has done, the Senator from New Jersey, Senator Bradley, and many others, in this Senate. So I would hope that we would not let the Government take one inch, make one effort that would indicate that we are headed towards Government regulation, Government involvement, censorship, if you will, and give the industry a chance to clean up its act. The last thing we want is more Government, particularly in a bill. As I have suggested, we are trying to deregulate and be more competitive. I hope that the Conrad amendment and the underlying amendment will be tabled, and that the amendment of the Senator from Illinois would then be adopted.

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I will just take a few minutes, I say to Senator Simon. First, I ask unanimous consent the vote on the motion to table the Conrad amendment occur at 8:10 p.m. to be followed immediately by a vote on the Simon amendment.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Dorgan-Thurmond, excuse me. I know the Senator from Nebraska has an interest in it. I would have to check with both Senator Dorgan and Senator Thurmond to see if we could get that agreement so at noon the Senator from South Dakota, Senator Pressler, could move to table. That would satisfy the Senator from Nebraska. I think Senator Bumpers is prepared to come to the floor to offer an amendment and maybe Senator Leahy. I am advised that may be an amendment that would take a considerable amount of time. As I look at the list of amendments, there are 24 amendments that are pending. Maybe there are some that will be accepted. I only see one here noted that would be accepted. That would indicate we still have a number of amendments to deal with in addition to the major amendment offered by Senators Dorgan and Thurmond. I hope we could complete action on this bill tomorrow evening so we could start on welfare reform on Wednesday. I know the managers are prepared. I have just been advised by the chairman [[Page S8160]] of the committee he is prepared to stay here all night if necessary. So I urge my colleagues on both sides, I looked down the list. There are Democrats and Republicans who have amendments. We are open for business. We will have votes this evening. I think most everybody has been able to return from their States, and I hope we can dispose of some of these amendments tonight. I notice an amendment by Senators Exon, Leahy, and Coats, a bipartisan amendment. I do not know what it is; something on pay phones, foreign ownership, red lining, burglar alarm. Senator Leahy has another amendment. Senator Feinstein has three amendments. So there are a number of amendments on each side. If I could just ask my colleagues to cooperate with both Senator Hollings and Senator Press- ler. As soon as we get clearance, then, I will ask consent that at noon tomorrow the Senator from South Dakota be recognized to table the Dorgan-Thurmond amendment. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I have been discussing the situation with the Senator from Nebraska, Senator Kerrey. As I understand it, he would be willing--I do not want to cut anybody off. This is an important amendment, as I said on Thursday and again on Friday. If we could agree that we could take up other amendments and then move to table the Kerrey amendment, say at noon tomorrow, would that be satisfactory to the Senator from Nebraska?

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the pending Dorgan-Thurmond amendment be laid aside until 12 noon Tuesday and at 12 noon Senator Pressler be recognized to make a motion to table the amendment.

Mr. DOLE. I thank the Senator from Nebraska. I think this will work. He may want to reserve some of that time before noon for final argument, maybe from 11 to 12 to be equally divided between--so you would have 1 hour of debate before the motion to table. So from 11 to 12 noon, unless there is objection, will be an hour equally divided on that amendment.

Mr. DOLE. The time will be allotted by the managers or their designees.

Mr. DOLE. So now we are down to real business if we can get some other amendments over here. Mr. PRESSLER addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE. Can I just change the consent?

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, earlier I asked that the Senator from South Dakota be recognized at 12 o'clock to move to table. I modify that part of the agreement and ask unanimous consent that he be recognized at 12:30 tomorrow to make a motion to table the Dorgan-Thurmond amendment, and that the hour for debate be from 11:30 to 12:30 instead of 11 to 12.

Mr. DOLE. I might indicate, this is made to accommodate a number of Senators, Vietnam veterans, who have a special event that does not end until about 12:15, as I understand. Before the Senator from Nebraska speaks, let me say that it is my understanding that there will be a vote fairly soon, as soon as Senator Feinstein comes to the floor. She has an amendment with Senator Lott. It should not take much debate. So I tell my colleagues, or members of their staff, there probably will be a vote in the next 45 minutes. I am now advised she cannot be here until about 6:30. Let me think about that, and I will say something after the Senator from Nebraska speaks. Mr. KERREY addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, this is a time for celebration--a brave American pilot, Capt. Scott O'Grady, has been rescued from Bosnian Serb-held territory. He is back at Aviano Air Base in Italy and will soon be on his way home to see his family. I am pleased to submit this resolution on behalf of myself and many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle commending Captain O'Grady, and the U.S. marines who rescued him, for their courage and professionalism. In the interests of getting this resolution adopted today, I agreed to modify several provisions, although I have a hard time to understand why they are objectionable. But first it was objected to stating the obvious--that many missions prior to Captain O'Grady's were not accompanied by adequate action against hostile air defenses. And second, objection to urging appropriate responses to the attack on Captain O'Grady. The term ``appropriate'' covers a lot, but apparently some want no response at all to the attack on Captain O'Grady or the attack on the rescue aircraft. But having said that, those provisions have been removed to satisfy my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I think we all want to make a statement and I believe this resolution makes an appropriate statement. The distinguished Senator from Massachusetts, one of the Senate's combat veterans, said yesterday that it would be appropriate to respond to this incident by bombing Serb missile sites. Mr. President, events like this should make all Americans proud and appreciative of the sacrifices made by men realize that courageous airmen like Captain O'Grady are the reason why our Armed Forces are second to none. Captain O'Grady was shot down by Bosnian Serb Forces and remarkably survived for 6 days in the forest--in hostile territory--by eating grass, leaves, and bugs and drinking rainwater, and evaded capture by Bosnian Serb troops. It was not only superb military training that enabled Scott O'Grady to survive, but his own personal intelligence and dogged determination. This same combination of fine training and individual strength also characterizes the U.S. Marines and the other personnel aboard the U.S.S. Kearsarge who were involved in this dramatic rescue operation. No doubt about it, these men and women are American heroes. In addition to giving them the respect and commendation they are due, we have a responsibility--a responsibility to ensure that they are not exposed to unnecessary risk. Every man and woman in the military has signed up knowing that there are risks involved and that one day their lives may be on the line. However, this does not mean that we take steps that unnecessarily increase risks or fail to take steps to address risks. Last fall, NATO commanders noted an increase in the deployment of surface-to-air missiles by Bosnian Serb forces. Under the dual-key procedure, NATO sought to take out these SAM sites, but the plans were vetoed by the UNPROFOR command. It is likely that had NATO gone ahead 6 months ago, Captain O'Grady never would have been shot down. So in addition to retaliating for this hostile action--and we do not need the permission of the United Nations or NATO to retaliate--we must take action to suppress the threat posed by the remaining SAM sites. We cannot in good conscience continue to send our pilots to patrol the no- fly zone without taking such measures. Furthermore, as this incident and recent developments underline, we must start a new approach in Bosnia. The bigger picture is that the United States and our Armed Forces are participating in a failure. It is high time to end this U.N. farce--to withdraw the U.N. Forces and lift the arms embargo on Bosnia. Prime Minister Haris Silajdzic reiterated yesterday in his meetings with Members of the Congress that the Bosnians do not want our troops on the ground; they have their own. They only want weapons to defend themselves. That is their fundamental right. I am encouraged by the overwhelming vote in the House to lift the arms embargo. It was a strong bipartisan vote on an amendment offered by a Democrat colleague in the House, Congressman Steny Hoyer. Clearly the tide has turned. The White House needs to move with this tide rather than try to swim against it.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I wanted to inquire, if the regular order is called for, it is my understanding that the amendment I offered would be pending; is that correct?

Mr. DOLE. That would be subject to a second-degree amendment?

Mr. DOLE. I am not certain when we can agree on a vote. I know for the Senator from North Dakota, this is a central issue, the one we are debating now. I am not trying to crowd anyone. I want to try to make some headway this morning. If Members believe that Friday is Friday and we do not vote on Friday, nobody will ever be here on Friday. We are going to have votes this morning, and I would like to accommodate everybody's request. I wonder if there is any objection-- and I do not want to offend anyone--to calling for the regular order. As I understand, the Senator from Pennsylvania has a second-degree amendment to my amendment. We are still trying to work out my amendment and the Daschle amendment, so we do not have one leader getting his adopted, the other not. We are trying to work that out. Is there any objection if we proceed on that basis?

Mr. DOLE. I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pending amendment for Senator Santorum to offer an amendment.

Mr. DOLE. Yes, we will lay aside the big amendment that the Senator is concerned about, Senator Dorgan's, and my amendment--just go ahead and offer it, period. That is all right.

Mr. DOLE. I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pending amendment for the Senator from Pennsylvania to offer an amendment with the understanding the Senator from North Dakota is going to be first recognized for a moment to make a statement.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, in response to the Senator from Nebraska, what we are trying to do is get an agreement on when we are going to vote, if we can get a 10:30 agreement to vote. Does anybody object to voting at 10:30? Otherwise, we will have a Sergeant at Arms vote. There is going to be a vote. Either vote on the amendment or have a live quorum and we will have a vote. It is up to the Senator from Nebraska.

Mr. DOLE. We had an agreement last night, I understand, with the Senator for 10 o'clock. He had the amendment in his hand last night.