Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

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

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I further ask that following the disposition of the Dole amendment, as amended, if amended, Senator Thompson be recognized to offer an amendment to limit the bill to Federal court cases only.

Mr. DOLE. I further ask that any votes ordered on or in relation to second-degree amendments to the Dole amendment, No. 617, occur beginning at 11:15, and that the final vote in the sequence be on or in relation to the Dole amendment, No. 617, as amended, if amended.

Mr. DOLE. So I modify the request, time to be equally divided between Senator Gorton and Senator Hollings or their designees.

Mr. DOLE. So I say to my colleagues, there will be no votes tonight. But anybody who has a second-degree amendment to the Dole amendment, or anybody who wishes to debate, we will be in session as long as that may take. I thank my colleagues on both sides for agreeing to this request. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent we have the next vote and then we recess for the policy luncheons until 2:15, and then come back and complete the additional rollcall votes. There will be one additional rollcall vote. The remainder of the votes will follow at 2:15.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, after consultation with the Democratic leader and a number of people who are conducting hearings, I withdraw the request. We will just go ahead and complete the votes now.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I am trying to reach an agreement. You say 8 o'clock is not enough time. Nine o'clock? Sooner or later we will move to table, if we cannot reach an agreement. We do not have any other recourse. We are the majority. We have to move legislation. I think the Senator from Washington has a good suggestion. I think we will proceed and let the Senator from Wisconsin proceed, and then I will be recognized at that point either to make a tabling motion or reach an agreement. Mr. FEINGOLD addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. We set aside the hour between 10 and 11 to discuss any of the amendments. We try to divide it up so everybody is treated fairly. We may come in at 9:30 for a half hour of morning business. no votes tomorrow, and no votes on Monday, except I assume there will be considerable debate on Monday. And then, as suggested by the Senator from Washington, Senator Gorton, there will be an hour set aside before the votes start for discussion of any of the amendments that may be offered. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOLE. I would be happy to make that arrangement. In other words, come in at 10:30 and speak for 5 minutes on amendments which we have already discussed. They can offer amendments on Monday.

Mr. DOLE. For the information of all Senators, this agreement means that any Senator who wishes to offer an amendment regarding medical malpractice must offer and debate that amendment today and/or Monday, and those votes will occur beginning at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, and thereafter medical malpractice amendments would no longer be in order to the bill except for an amendment that may be offered by each leader or their designee. I assume that would be the managers of the bill. So having reached that agreement, I can announce there will be no more votes this evening. The Senate will not be in session tomorrow because both the Republicans and the Democrats have conferences tomorrow. The Senate will come in at noon on Monday, be back on the bill on Monday. We may come in at 11 a.m. for morning business. There will be no votes on Monday, but we expect a lot of debate on Monday. And then rollcall votes will start at 11 a.m. on Tuesday.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, we have reached an agreement on the medical malpractice amendments. It has been cleared by the Democratic leader, Senator Daschle. I will now read the consent. I ask unanimous consent that all amendments regarding medical malpractice only be in order for the duration of Thursday's session of the Senate and Monday's session of the Senate, except for one amendment each, which may be offered by the majority and minority leaders, or their designees.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I further ask that any votes ordered on or in relation to the pending Thomas amendment, or on or in relation to the Wellstone amendment, and any other second-degree amendments that may be offered to the McConnell amendment occur in sequence at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, May 2, and that the final vote in sequence be on or in relation to the McConnell amendment No. 603, as amended, if amended.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, America will not be intimidated by the madmen who masterminded last week's vicious and cowardly bomb attack in Oklahoma City. America will not be paralyzed into inaction by those who have committed this evil deed. And, yes, justice will be rendered. The guilty will be punished. And America--slowly, but with determination--will begin to heal herself. Our job today is not to dwell on the past, but to look to the future--to lay the foundation for a comprehensive antiterrorism plan for America. We must take every reasonable step, every responsible action, to reduce the chances that other, similar tragedies will occur elsewhere in the United States. That is why I am pleased today to join with the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch, and with my distinguished colleague from Oklahoma, Senator Nickles, in introducing the Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act of 1995. Many of the provisions of this act were contained in S. 3, the anticrime bill introduced by Senate Republicans last January: Increased penalties for those who conspire to commit firearms and explosives offenses; expanded extradition authority for the attorney general; the Alien Terrorist Removal Act, designed to deport alien terrorists in a prompt manner without disclosing vital national security information; and increased funding for Federal law enforcement, including the FBI. Today's legislation also contains comprehensive habeas corpus reform, which is something the Senator from Utah, the chairman of the committee, has long sought, which should go a long way in preventing violent criminals from gaming the system--with more delays, more unnecessary appeals, and more grief for the victims of crime and their families. In fact, the President said justice is going to be swift. I am not certain how swift it is going to be if they can appeal and appeal and appeal in the event they are apprehended, tried and convicted-- continued appeals for 7, 8, 10, 15 years in some cases. During a recent television interview, the President did say we needed strong, comprehensive habeas reform so that those who committed this evil deed will get what they deserve--punishment that is swift, certain, and severe. This legislation will help accomplish this goal. With respect to international efforts to counter terrorism, the legislation expands efforts to isolate the worst of the rogue regimes: State sponsors of terrorism. It would make it easier to support international antiterrorism efforts. We need to send a strong signal to our allies and our adversaries--if you are with us in fighting the scourge of terrorism, we will try to help--but if you are aiding terrorists and terrorist states, it is no more business as usual. Finally, this legislation contains many of the reforms sought by President Clinton himself--prohibitions on tagging of plastic explosives to make them more detectable; and amendments to the Fair Credit Reporting Act to ease access to financial and credit reports in terrorism cases. The bottom line is that fighting terrorism is not, and should not be, a partisan issue. America must stand together--Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives--to confront the terrorist threat wherever it may exist. And, of course, I look forward to working with President Clinton and with my distinguished colleague, Senator Daschle, in refining this proposal, and perhaps considering other worthy proposals, to strengthen America's antiterrorism hand. Today's legislation is not the end but the beginning of the process that hopefully will lead to a strong antiterrorism action plan for our country. And I have been reminded today that we want to look back at the legislation we pass a year from now or 2 years from now and know that it is just as good then as it may appear to be now. In other words, we should not be carried away because of the emotion of the moment. And I know that under the leadership of the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee that will not happen. But, Mr. President, as we move forward with legislation, let me add a cautionary note: No legislation can make America completely safe. In a free society, there is no such thing as absolute security. We must work to make our country safer from the terrorist threat, but there are no guarantees that every terrorist, every madman, can be stopped. The American people deserve the straight story, and the straight story is that America is not an impregnable fortress. Let me also say that there has been a great deal of speculation about the so-called Attorney General guidelines. These guidelines are the internal Justice Department policies that govern if, and when, the FBI can monitor and infiltrate domestic organizations suspected of being engaged in terrorist activities. Some say the guidelines are too restrictive and, in fact, hamstring the FBI. Others argue that the guidelines go too far. This is a complex issue, and one made more complex and more urgent by the fact that our constitutional liberties are at stake. Before rushing to judgment, we should get all the facts out on the table: Have the guidelines been effective? Do they provide adequate authority to the FBI to monitor the activities of domestic terrorist organizations? Have there been any instances when an FBI agent sought authority to initiate an investigation and this authority was denied? And if so, why? In my view, we should hear from the law enforcement professionals themselves first before drawing any conclusions. And that is why this legislation asks the Director of the FBI to provide Congress with a detailed report on the adequacy of the guidelines and any other laws regulating the surveillance of suspected terrorist groups operating within the United States. In other words, let us get the facts first and then let us make decisions later. Let us not rush to judgment without all the facts. Let me say that in this bill--and the Senator from Utah may discuss it also--we left out the provision as far as expanding the authority of the military. That was in the President's request. We have not seen the draft language. But I think that is another area where we want to be very, very careful, before we start bringing the military into law enforcement areas. And I believe my colleague from Utah agrees. It is reported in the paper this morning ``to allow the military to participate in domestic law enforcement.'' That may sound good on the face of it, but I think there are a lot of pitfalls there and a lot of dangers. We better be certain we look at this before we do anything by statute. So hopefully that will be a subject of extensive hearings in the Judiciary Committee. Finally, I join all of my Senate colleagues in extending our thoughts and prayers to the good people of Oklahoma City. The self-sacrifice and heroism they have displayed in the past week has been an inspiration to us all. They have been doing their duty. It is now our obligation to lay the groundwork for an America that is more secure for all of her citizens. As I understand, Mr. President, the Senator from Utah will now speak on this issue.

Mr. DOLE

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

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

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I advise my colleagues that it is our hope to have an agreement here in the next few minutes. And if the agreement is reached, then there will be no more votes this evening and no votes on Monday. There will be a number of votes starting at 11 o'clock on Tuesday morning, maybe as many as four or five. So I indicate to my colleagues that I do not believe there will be any more votes this evening. We will know for certain in matter of minutes. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, thank you. (The remarks of Mr. Dole pertaining to the introduction of legislation are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'') Amendment No. 604 to Amendment No. 603

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, Brian Hallen, the Senate Enrolling Clerk, will retire from the Senate effective May 26, 1995, after almost 30 years of Government service. Brian's Government career started in January 1966 as a linotype operator at the Government Printing Office. He later became a proofreader and in 1975 was detailed to the Office of the Senate Enrolling Clerk. In December 1981, he became the Senate's first Assistant Enrolling Clerk, a position he held until March 1986 when he was promoted to his current position as the Senate Enrolling Clerk. Brian has dedicated his Senate service to improving the operation of the Enrolling Clerk's office and has gladly and efficiently assisted in an ongoing effort to reduce congressional printing costs. During his tenure many innovative and cost-saving changes have been implemented. Among his accomplishments was the computerization of the very detailed engrossing and enrolling process. This enabled his office to have complete control over the accuracy and efficiency of the work and a substantial reduction in the cost and amount of time necessary to produce the printed legislation. Brian is retiring with the satisfaction of knowing that he has done his best. His decisions were made with the best interests of the Senate in mind, and because of that mindset the institution itself is a better place. I know all Senators will join me in thanking Brian for his long, dedicated, and distinguished service, and extending our best wishes for a long and healthy retirement.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I understand there are speakers on the way to the floor. In the meantime, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I am advised by staff and the manager of the bill on this side, Senator Gorton, that it will be about an hour before there will be speakers available. They are this measure. I move that the Senate stand in recess until the hour of 2:30 p.m.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I want to signal my strong support for S. 565, the Product Liability Fairness Act. My distinguished colleagues, Senators Gorton, Rockefeller, and Pressler, are to be commended for their leadership on this particular legislation. This legislation is needed for several reasons. Our present system of liability has been estimated to cost the American economy an astounding $117 billion. In addition to this tort tax, our system of liability stifles innovation and prevents better--often safer--products from reaching the marketplace. The present system of liability also undermines American competitiveness, both here and abroad. There has been a concerted effort to spread misinformation about these reforms--scare tactics--in order to hide the real issues. So let me be clear: The reforms contained in this bill, despite efforts to portray them otherwise, do not prevent persons who are harmed from recovering full compensation for their injuries. In fact, this legislation addresses abuses that undermine such compensation. Nor does this legislation alter civil rights and environmental laws in any way. In fact, the legislation explicitly excludes such Federal laws. What this legislation is about is fairness. Our legal system is one of the bedrocks of our free society. But over the last 25 years, it has succumbed to efforts to turn it away from American principles, individual responsibilities and justice. In many cases, our system of liability resembles a lottery, where damage awards become windfalls and often deserving plaintiffs do without. Thus, I strongly support the provisions of this bill that seek to rein in abusive punitive damages. Punitive damages are not intended to compensate victims, as the name suggests, they are intended to punish wrongdoing. But punitive damages have been widely abused in recent years, and the problem now affects every American. Mr. President, I plan to offer an amendment later today. As I understand, after a couple of votes and after disposition of the Brown amendment, I will be recognized to offer an amendment. That may be later tonight, 7 or 8 o'clock or it may be sometime tomorrow morning. In any event, I will offer the amendment later and expand on these protections at that time and what I believe the amendment does and does not do. But I am talking about protection for Little League players, the Girl Scouts, and small business. Groups like that are at risk from abusive lawsuits and overwhelming punitive damages. I hope to give you some examples of how this affects the Girl Scouts, Little League, and others--how many boxes of cookies they have to sell to protect themselves from frivolous lawsuits, in some cases. We cannot allow the threat of liability to keep hard-working Americans from volunteering their time to help. We must not allow the threat of liability to sink small businesses who often can barely keep their doors open. Although I support the Rockefeller-Gorton bill, I believe we cannot simply stop with reforms that help big business alone. We have to take a look at small business and some of the charitable groups and other groups that most American families have contact with. It is as much our responsibility to help the little guy, and that is what my amendment will achieve. This amendment leaves the underlying provisions on the measure of punitive damages intact. Thus, punitive damages would be limited to three times economic damages, or $250,000, whichever is greater. What my amendment would do is to take the same provision in the underlying bill and extend these protections to Americans who are often least able to cope with outrageous punitive damages. Thus, instead of limiting these protections to product liability actions, my amendment would extend them to ``any civil action affecting interstate commerce.'' I emphasize again that this amendment in no way undermines full compensation to victims, nor does it alter Federal laws. Most of the issues raised by the Rockefeller-Gorton bill are well known. The Commerce Committee has considered similar legislation in the 97th, 99th, 100th, 101st, and 102d Congresses, and a similar bill was considered on the floor in the 102d and 103d Congresses. We will have a reasonable time to debate these issues, but it is my hope we will not engage in dilatory tactics to distract the Senate from moving forward on this important legislation. Having said that, I hope we will complete action on this legislation sometime midweek next week. I know that on Friday of this week the Democrats have a conference outside the city and Republicans have a conference inside the city. But we will be in session late tonight and late, late tomorrow night and, hopefully, we can at that point see the end when we might complete action on the legislation. It would be my intention to file a cloture motion if it appears we cannot complete action in a timely fashion. I will say, as I have said before, the Senate has a lot of work to do to catch up with many things that have been sent to us from the House. My view is we will get it done. It will mean we will have fewer recesses in the Senate. It means we will be here many more days probably than the House will be in the next 100 days. It will mean long evenings. But I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle understand that we have a responsibility, that we all made statements to get here to the voters of the United States, and we intend to keep our word to the American voters, win, lose, or draw. So it is my hope we will have a very productive several weeks before the brief Memorial Day recess and that will be about the last recess, maybe with the exception of a couple of days July 4 and 5 before we decide what to do with the August recess. It is not a statutory recess. It can be changed by resolution and it may be if we cannot complete our work in time we might have to abbreviate the August recess. I hope that is not the case, because many of my colleagues have made plans to be with their families and made other plans. So we will do the best we can to accommodate people on both sides of the aisle. I do believe that we have a responsibility. We know it takes longer in the Senate. We know the Founding Fathers planned it that way. This was to be the deliberative body and we are deliberate, believe me. Sometimes it is almost too deliberate. Today is an exceptional day because many of our colleagues are attending services for former Senator John Stennis. I think 25 of our colleagues are in Mississippi today. So that necessarily means we may not accomplish much until they return about 5 o'clock.

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