Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Take it up at 9:15, vote at 10. Now we are going to take it up at 9:45, vote in 45 minutes. I understand it is a very technical amendment.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me indicate this is the first time we have had a vote like this all year. I do not like these kinds of votes because it punishes people who are not here for no good reason, but we could not get an agreement to vote on an amendment and, as I understand it, we are not going to get any time agreement on any amendment. The managers have been doing an excellent job, I want to indicate, both to Senator Pressler and Senator Hollings. I would like to complete action on this bill. It is a very important bill. No one is trying to rush it, but if we cannot get an agreement on a technical vote, I do not know what other recourse there is but sometime today to file cloture, have a pro forma session tomorrow, and then have a cloture vote on Monday around 5 o'clock to see if we cannot speed up movement of this bill. If there is a willingness to agree to vote on the very important amendment offered by Senator Dorgan and Senator Thurmond from South Carolina, even at 5 o'clock on Monday, if we could agree to vote at 5 o'clock on Monday, agree to vote on the Santorum amendment here in the next 30 minutes? Failing that, we will have no recourse. Under the order, as I understand it, the Senator from Pennsylvania will be recognized to offer his amendment. We can have a vote, move to table the amendment, vote against tabling, and we can have another vote and another vote. But we do not make any progress. But if the Senator from Nebraska is determined, as I believe he is, that we will not have any agreements or any votes, then we will just have to have some procedural votes between now and 2 o'clock. If there is any inclination on anybody's part to make any kind of agreement, certainly I am prepared as the leader to try to accommodate all of my colleagues, many of whom are not here today, and many of whom would like not to be here today. But, having said that, I yield the floor. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE. I certainly have no objection. I am not indicating any disagreement with the Senator from Nebraska. He has every right he wants, and has exercised his right. I wonder if we might agree that there would be--the Senator does not want a vote up or down on the amendment, right? Will the Senator from Nebraska let us vote up or down on the amendment after 30 minutes of debate equally divided?

Mr. DOLE. I am not managing the bill, but I just suggest that maybe we vote at 11:30, and the Senator from Nebraska have half that time and the other half would be divided----

Mr. DOLE. This is Dole and Daschle combined.

Mr. DOLE. I ask that the vote occur on this amendment at 12 noon and that the time be equally divided in the usual form.

Mr. DOLE. And then if the motion to table is not successful, would the Senator let us adopt the amendment?

Mr. DOLE. I do not know anything about that. If I could suggest this, that the Senator from Pennsylvania offer his amendment and after 20 minutes of debate, or 30 minutes of debate --the Senator from Nebraska 10 minutes, the managers or someone in opposition to the amendment, the Senator from Pennsylvania 10 minutes--that the Senator from South Dakota then be recognized to move to table the Santorum amendment. Would that be satisfactory?

Mr. DOLE. Is there any objection?

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I call for the regular order, thereby making the pending business amendment No. 1255.

Mr. DOLE. Not as far as I am concerned. The Senator from West Virginia would like a rollcall vote. That would be the last vote if we can work it out. If not, we will stay until we work it out.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, what is the pending business?

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk and ask it be read on behalf of myself, Senator Helms, Senator Warner, and many others. I am not certain of all the cosponsors. This has been cleared, I understand, on both sides.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, was leaders' time reserved?

Mr. DOLE. I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period for the transaction of morning business from now until 3 o'clock, with Members permitted to speak for 5 minutes therein.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, last week, I ventured out to Hollywood and called upon the executives of the entertainment industry to exercise some good citizenship and put an end to the steady flow of mindless violence and loveless sex they serve up each day to our young people. I said that a ``line has been crossed--not just of taste, but of human dignity and decency. It is crossed every time sexual violence is given a catchy tune. When teen suicide is set to an appealing beat. When Hollywood's dream factories turn out nightmares of depravity.'' Although I made it very clear that government censorship was not the answer, the response to my remarks has been predictable and predictably ferocious. All the usual suspects--Oliver Stone, Ed Asner, Norman Lear--have been out in force, rushing to Hollywood's defense and lashing out at anyone who would dare criticize the entertainment industry for its excesses. I will continue to speak out because people like Bill Bennett, Paul Simon, Pete Domenici, Bill Bradley, and C. Delores Tucker all happen to be right: cultural messages can and do bore deep into the hearts and minds of our impressionable young. And when these messages are negative ones--repeated hour after hour, day after day, week after week--they can strip our children of that most precious gift of all: Their innocence. Apparently, the American people share this concern, particularly when it comes to television, perhaps the most dominant cultural force in America today. A recent survey conducted by USA weekend magazine revealed that an astonishing 96 percent of the 65,000 readers surveyed are ``very or somewhat concerned about sex on TV,'' 97 percent are ``very or somewhat concerned'' about the use of vulgar language on television shows, and another 97 percent are ``very or somewhat concerned'' about television violence. Jim Freese, the principal of Homestead High School in Fort Wayne, IN, put it this way: ``I'm seeing more instances of inappropriate language around school. It is part of the vocabulary, and often they do not think about some of the words because they hear them so often on TV. It is a steady diet. Program after program has this inappropriate language.'' According to a study commissioned by USA Weekend, 370 instances of ``crude language or sexual situations'' were recorded during a five- night period of prime-time programming, or one every 8.9 minutes. Two hundred and eight of these incidents occurred between 8 and 9 p.m., the so-called family hour. Of course, we have more to lose than to gain by putting Washington in charge of our culture. Instead, it is my hope that the decision-makers within the entertainment industry will voluntarily accept a calling beyond the bottom line and help our Nation maintain the innocence of our children. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the cover article from the USA Weekend magazine be reprinted in the Record immediately after my remarks.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I further ask unanimous consent that this agreement be null and void if a unanimous-consent agreement can be subsequently reached governing the Senate's consideration of legislation regarding the congressional gift rules and an original bill regarding lobbying reform, or a bill that encompasses both proposals.

Mr. DOLE. And the second part. I further ask unanimous consent that if, after third reading of the second bill, which is gift rules, that bill contains matter which only applies to the Senate, the Senate then immediately turn to the consideration of a Senate resolution that contains the text of that language; that a vote occur on the resolution, without any intervening action or debate; and that the Senate bill be indefinitely postponed.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, we have had some ongoing negotiations the last several days on lobbying reform legislation and gift ban legislation as it affects the Senate or affects Congress, depending on which prevails. We have a unanimous-consent agreement. It is fairly lengthy, but I can read it. In any event, I ask that it be printed in the Record. I ask unanimous consent that not later than Friday, July 28, and after notification of the minority leader, that we proceed to S. 101, a lobbying gift ban bill, the bill having been discharged and placed on the calendar by this consent agreement; that the motion to proceed be agreed to and the bill then be automatically divided into two separate pieces of legislation; the first measure embodying the text of title I regarding lobbying reform, and the second measure embodying the text of title II regarding gift rules; that the clerk be authorized to make the necessary changes in the form of the measure or matter that are appropriate, so that each measure stands on its own; that the Senate then begin consideration of the measure embodying title I; that immediately upon the disposition of that measure, the Senate turn to the consideration of the measure embodying title II; and that the preceding all occur without any intervening action or debate. That is the first part of the request.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. [[Page S8086]]

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, we are still in a period for morning business. I wanted to indicate that the chairman of the Commerce Committee, Senator Pressler, is standing by. He is prepared to do business. He is sincere about finishing the telecommunications bill, and he is prepared to stay here for the rest of the afternoon and on into the night. But in order for him to do business, somebody has to offer an amendment. Now, it is my hope that we can finish this bill by next Tuesday evening. Senators Pressler and Hollings think that may be possible. I understand that there are some who wanted to debate and said they were not getting time to debate, and they are not here at the present time-- Senator Dorgan and Senator Kerrey. Senator Pressler is on the floor. If you want to debate your amendment, this is a good opportunity. We want to finish this bill and move on to either welfare reform or regulatory reform next week. So, hopefully, we will finish the bill no later than Tuesday evening. We will not file cloture today. This is an important bill. We should have a lengthy debate. A lot of people have different ideas on this bill. Certainly, we should be able to complete action on the bill by Tuesday. That would give us the better part of about 4\1/2\ to 5 days, which seems to be a considerable length of time, considering the importance of the bill. But I just say that Senator Pressler is here and ready to do business. If the Senator from Iowa has an amendment, we would be happy to engage in a debate. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I join with all Senators in welcoming Kelly Johnston as secretary of the Senate. For the past 3 years, Kelly has served as staff director of the Senate Republican Policy Committee, where he has won the respect of all Senators--Republican and Democrat--for his intelligence and integrity. Kelly has an impressive 14-year career working in the legislative and executive branch, and I am confident he will do an outstanding job in overseeing the legislative administration of the Senate. Kelly will succeed Sheila Burke, who has served as secretary since the beginning of this Congress. During that time, Sheila succeeded in creating a secretary's office that was both smaller and smarter. Under her leadership, a 12.5-percent reduction in the secretary's budget was achieved, without cutting needed services to Members and the public. Sheila also took the lead in bringing many advancements in technology to the secretary's office, including many that will result in long-term savings of tax dollars. Under her guidance, improvements were made in the Senate page school--improvements that will ensure a quality education for the pages, and ones that saved the Senate close to $100,000. Sheila was also the guiding force behind the family night, in the Senate dining room, allowing all of us to spend more time with our most important constituents--our families. Sheila will continue to serve as my chief-of-staff, and I know all Senators join me in thanking this dedicated public servant for a job well done.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, at Senator Grassley's request, I have cosponsored the Protection of Children from Computer Pornography Act, which he introduced earlier this week. Since coming to Washington, Senator Grassley has been a leader in the fight to protect our children from the evils of pornography and sexual abuse. In 1994, for example, Senator Grassley was successful in passing a law that made it a Federal crime to produce child pornography in a foreign country with the intent to distribute it in the United States. And, in 1993, I joined with my colleague from Iowa in supporting a sense of the Senate resolution opposing the Clinton administration's attempt to weaken the Federal child pornography laws with its misguided legal brief in the Knox case. Senator Grassley's bill raises many technical issues that must be carefully examined before the Senate reaches any final conclusions. And, of course, whatever we do must be absolutely consistent with the first amendment. I look forward to hearings on Senator Grassley's bill and to a full exposition of the complicated issues involved here. But, in the meantime, I wanted to show my support for my colleague from Iowa, whose commitment to protecting our children has never waivered.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am pleased to note that a Treasury official appearing before the Finance Committee this week testified in support of targeting estate tax relief to family-owned businesses. Time and time again, family business owners across the country have told me about the unfairness of the current estate tax and its 55 percent rate. Too often heirs are forced to sell the family business or farm just to pay the estate tax. And too often the buyer of the family business is a large corporation that does not necessarily have the best interests of the community or the business employees at heart. I will be introducing legislation in the coming weeks that will allow family-owned and other closely held businesses to remain in the family after the death of an owner. I intend to drastically reduce the estate tax rates for the value of a closely held business. For the smallest of businesses, the estate tax should be virtually eliminated. Without the estate tax burden on the backs of American families, they can continue to prosper. And when families continue to operate their businesses we all benefit--the business employees keep their jobs, the Government receives income taxes on business profits, and the families retain their livelihood. The estate tax is not a Democratic or a Republican problem, or one that affects only rural or urban families. That is why I am working with Members of both sides of the aisle to develop broad, bipartisan support for the legislation. There are farmers, ranchers, or family businesses in each State that would benefit from the legislation. I welcome all Senators to join this effort. I am already working with Senators Roth, Baucus, Grassley, Pryor, Simpson, Breaux, Pressler, D'Amato, Nickles, Burns, and others to design targeted estate tax relief for family-owned businesses. The legislation will provide relief to those that need it most-- families whose estates are made up primarily of a family business. It is these families who would otherwise be forced to sell their business to pay the estate tax. And in determining whether a family business is comprised primarily of an estate, I would like to exclude the family's principal residence. This would ensure that heirs won't have to sell their residence to keep their business. Because this legislation is designed to help families that hold on to their businesses, if a family chooses to sell a substantial portion of the business [[Page S8083]] within a period of time after the decedent dies, all or part of the reduced tax rate may be recaptured. The legislation will allow families to leave their businesses in the hands of family members, or trusted, long-term employees of the business. The bill will also extend the period of time available to compute the alternative valuation date for the family business. This will help resolve disputes with the Internal Revenue Service about the value of the business when the value is closely tied to the skills of the decedent. Family-owned businesses are the job creators in this country. In the 1980's they accounted for an increase of more than 20 million private sector jobs. I look forward to working with the farm, ranch, and small business community, and Members of the House and Senate, to provide relief for out most precious resource--the family business entrepreneur.