Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I, therefore, ask for its first reading.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I inquire of the Chair if H.R. 1380 has arrived from the House of Representatives.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I now ask for its second reading and, on behalf of the Democratic leader, I object.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, this has been cleared by the Democratic leader. I ask unanimous consent that at 1 o'clock today, the Senate proceed to H.R. 956, the product liability bill.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, on behalf of all the Senate, I extend my sympathies to Senator Nickles, Senator Inhofe, Members of the House Oklahoma delegation, Gov. Frank Keating, and, through them, to all the citizens of Oklahoma for the loss they suffered last Wednesday. Kansas and Oklahoma share a common border. And our citizens also share common values. Values like love of God. Love of family. Perseverance through tough times. And a commitment to help those in need. The citizens of Oklahoma displayed these values time and time again this past week, and in doing so, they inspired America and the world. While all the people of Oklahoma deserve our admiration, the citizens of Oklahoma City are worthy of special praise. It is their friends and family members who were lost as a result of this brutal crime. But while many of Oklahoma City's buildings were shattered, its spirit has stood strong. I am reminded of the words of the great World War II journalist Ernie Pyle, who once wrote, ``Oklahoma City is an especially friendly town. People there have a pride about their town *** They just wouldn't live anywhere else.'' That pride has never left the people of Oklahoma City, and it will guide them during the difficult days ahead. I salute the firemen, the paramedics, the rescue workers, and all those who have generously volunteered their time and their labor to the relief effort; the members of the Red Cross and the Salvation Army. I commend President Clinton for the way he and his administration have responded to this tragedy. The criminal investigation has been thorough and swift, and the tone set by the President right on the mark: Those who have perpetrated this unspeakable evil are cowards. There is absolutely no justification, no excuse, for what took place last Wednesday in Oklahoma City. Killing innocent children and other defenseless citizens is the depraved act of depraved minds. I also want to commend Attorney General Reno for publicly stating that crime deserving of the ultimate sanction, this is it. As the rebuilding process continues in Oklahoma City, we must also begin looking to the future. Although there is no such thing as absolute security in a free society, we have an obligation to do everything within our power to minimize the chances that other, similar tragedies will occur elsewhere in the United States. Last week, I wrote to President Clinton to tell him that Senate Republicans stand ready to work with the administration to develop a comprehensive antiterrorism plan for America. Senate Republicans have sponsored a variety of antiterrorism proposals, ranging from the Alien Terrorist Removal Act, to increased penalties for certain terrorist- related activities, to proposals designed to give our law enforcement officials the tools they need, such as expanded wiretap authority. I am also familiar with the administration's own antiterrorism package, as well as the ideas mentioned by the President last night on television. These ideas will be fully considered. Republican staff have also been working closely with the FBI on a comprehensive antiterrorism initiative, and we are prepared to give this initiative the fast-track consideration it deserves. Mr. President, during World War II, the great Senator Arthur Vandenberg often repeated his belief that ``partisanship stops at the water's edge.'' Terrorists--both foreign and domestic--should have no doubt that partisanship also stops at evil's edge--an edge those responsible for the Oklahoma City bombing have clearly stepped over. I know I speak for all Members of the Senate when I say that we stand with the people of Oklahoma, committed to doing all that is needed to protect America from the terrorist threat.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thank the Chaplain for his timely and comforting words.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, following the leaders' time, there will be morning business until 1 o'clock, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes each. Shortly, Senator Nickles will submit a Senate resolution regarding the bombing in Oklahoma City. It is also my intention to begin consideration of H.R. 956, the Product Liability Act. I am prepared to say there will be no rollcall votes today, but that will be up to the managers on the product liability bill. There will be a vote on the Nickles resolution, if agreeable, at noon tomorrow.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I thank my colleagues from Oklahoma, Senator Nickles and Senator Inhofe. I know they have been under a great deal of stress. They have performed outstanding service for their constituents. All of us in this Chamber appreciate that very much. We do have permission to go to the liability bill at 1 o'clock. I indicated earlier there would be no votes before 3. I am now advised that there are a great number of Senators who are not here. Because of that, I will say that there will be no votes today. I urge my colleagues that we have to catch up with the House. We are not going to be able to do that if we come back after a 2-week vacation and only half of us show up. It is pretty hard to have much meaningful happen. This time, OK; next time we will have votes. I want to give everybody advance notice on both sides of the aisle that when we say no votes before 3, it means probably votes after 3. But, also, there might be an amendment that might take the rest of the day. I do not like to have Sergeant at Arms votes to see who is in town and who is not at town. I know many of my colleagues are at work wherever they may be. We need either telecommunications, or maybe because of the urgency, the antiterrorism bill will be ready by next week. I think we can move very quickly on that. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I will just take a moment to talk about our departed friend who served here for many, many years, Senator John Stennis. When he left the Senate in 1989, he had served in this Chamber for 41 years--nearly one-fifth of the Senate's history. And those of us privileged to serve with him knew that he was one of the true giants of that history. Senator Stennis passed away yesterday at the age of 93, and I join all Senators in expressing our condolences on the death of our former colleague and in extending our sympathies to members of his family. Senator Stennis and I came from different regions of the country, from different political parties, and we had different views on many issues. But no one could know or serve with John Stennis without admiring his character, his integrity, or his patriotism. John Stennis loved the Senate and worked to make it a better place. He was the first chairman of the Senate Committee on Standards and Conduct and was the author of the Senate's first code of ethics. John Stennis also loved America, and as chairman of the Armed Services Committee, he never wavered from his belief that America's national defense should be second to none. John Stennis was also a man of remarkable courage. In his seventies, he was shot and left for dead by robbers outside his Washington home. And in his eighties, he lost a leg to cancer. On both occasions, he not only recovered, but he was also back at work long before anyone thought possible. Those of us who were here at the time will always remember the days when Senator Stennis returned to the Chamber and the outpouring of respect and admiration that he received. Mr. President, during his final years in this Chamber, Senator John Stennis was asked in an interview how he would like to be remembered, and he responded: ``You couldn't give me a finer compliment than just to say, `He did his best.''' Today, his family, friends, and former colleagues can take solace in the fact that he will be remembered exactly how he wished--as a man who always gave nothing less than his best. Mr. President, if no other Senator is seeking recognition, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I would just say I thank the Senator from South Dakota for letting me be a cosponsor. Senator Byrd is certainly a unique figure in the history of this country, let alone the Senate. I extend my congratulations for his continued commitment to the institution as reflected in the four volumes. I certainly congratulate him for his effort. the senate and its history

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, has leader time been reserved?

Mr. DOLE. I have two brief statements. I will use part of my leader time.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I would like to address a certain letter that is being passed around in the House to be sent to the President. I understand that the President may have already received it. The letter urges the President to veto H.R. 831, Permanent Deduction of Health Care Insurance Costs of Self-Employed Individuals. The letter has over 139 House Democrats' signatures. The conference report to H.R. 831 passed the House last week, and we passed it in the Senate on Monday. The President received the bill on Tuesday, April 4, and it lies there waiting for the President to sign it into public law. It is critical to 3.2 million tax filers that this bill be enacted prior to April 17--tax day. If it is not, then 11 days from now, less than 2 weeks, 3.2 million filers will find that they cannot use a deduction that they have had since 1986. Mr. President, 3.2 million filers will find that they will have to pay more taxes than they did last year. And Mr. President, these 3.2 million filers are farmers, and small business owners all across America. the letter Now, this letter alludes that Republicans somehow carved out a special record straight. The conference report simply clarifies the definition of a binding contract, and let me add that this clarification was raised by a Democrat Member, not a Republican. Second, the letter insinuates that during conference, Republicans took out a provision imposing a tax on U.S. citizens who renounce citizenship. Mr. President, we have already been through this. We explained earlier this week, that in the Senate we agreed to impose taxation on U.S. citizens who renounce citizenship. But, this measure was adopted without the benefit of hearings. Subsequently, the Finance Committee's oversight subcommittee held a preliminary hearing. This proposal raises important questions, and the hearings exposed some serious concerns. We simply decided to not delay action on H.R. 831 while we continued to consider alternatives to this expatriate provision. That is right, let me set the record straight once again--we are not opposing this in any way. Just the opposite, we want to get this done. The conferees asked the Joint Committee on Taxation to study this provision and other alternatives and get back to us by June 1, 1995. It is also clear that this provision will be effective as of February 6. But while concerns remained with the provision, we did not include it in H.R. 831. Also, Mr. President, during floor debate in the House on the tax bill, one of the signatories of the letter, Congressman Gephardt, tried to put a similar expatriate tax provision in the tax bill--with an effective date of October 1, 1996, much later than the Finance Committee provision. The letter to the President claims that House Democrat Members want to close an important tax loophole for millionaires, but it seems like they want to close it very slowly. conclusion It is my sincere hope that the President gets the record straight. Because if he does not, and he decides to play politics as usual, then 3.2 million farmers, ranchers, small businesses, and taxpayers will suffer for it. It has been 3 days since the President received H.R. 831, and I urge the President to sign it into law. There is no reason to delay any longer. It should be signed as soon as possible so that taxpayers can finish preparing their tax returns in time.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, this week marks the third anniversary of the war against Bosnia and Herzegovina. It also marks the third anniversary of the international community's failure in Bosnia--a failure the United States, under both the Bush and Clinton administrations, has participated in. The biggest mistake made by world leaders was extending, in practice, the arms embargo on the former Yugoslavia to the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina--which is an internationally recognized state and member of the United Nations. In addition to violating Bosnia's fundamental right of self-defense--a right which is recognized in article 51 of the U.N. Charter--this policy has had the effect of prolonging the war. It has prolonged the war by ensuring that the Serbs maintain such a superiority in weapons that they are not compelled to sign any deal--even one which rewards them with half of Bosnia as envisioned by the so-called contact group. Now, the administration says that this European-designed policy has managed to contain the war and prevented further humanitarian disasters. We should not rush to pat ourselves on the back for our great humanitarianism until we look at the facts. The facts are that over 200,000 people have been killed over the past 3 years, 17,000 of them children. Hundreds of thousands of civilians have been expelled from their homes because of their ethnicity and religion. Concentration camps, rape, and mass graves have become the tolls of ethnic cleansing--which is just another word for genocide. Homes, churches, and monuments have been reduced to rubble. Putting aside the human factor, from an international legal perspective, the world has watched as a U.N. member state has been attacked and occupied. And, now international leaders want to reward those attackers and occupiers, ostensibly in the pursuit of peace. Yes, we must give credit to those brave aid workers and U.N. soldiers who have sacrificed and risked their lives to bring food and medicine to those in need. The policy is not their fault; they do not make policy--policymakers in Washington and European capitals do. Nevertheless, we should not fool ourselves, feeding people who are trapped in U.N. safe havens that are anything but safe, while denying them the means to defend themselves is bad policy. Yesterday, the Bosnian Prime Minister said in an interview that the Bosnians should prepare for a decade of war. It may sound pessimistic to some, but in my view it's pretty realistic if the present policy continues. Why should Bosnian Serb leaders agree to a settlement? Why should Bosnian Serb forces give up any of the 70 percent of the territory they occupy? Because U.N. forces on the ground? Because of NATO planes that fly overhead but do not bomb? It is clear that the international community does not have the will to live up to its commitment to protect the Bosnians, so why can't we allow them to protect themselves? The present policy of keeping the U.N. forces in Bosnia indefinitely amounts to occupation. UNPROFOR should be withdrawn and the arms embargo should be lifted. That is the only policy is the only policy that offers any hope of bringing this war to and end by creating a military balance on the ground. Mr. President, if the cease-fire due to expire on May 1 is not extended and a peace settlement has not been agreed to by the Serbs, I intend to take up the Dole-Lieberman legislation on the Senate floor shortly after the April recess. Three years of monitored genocide is enough.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, it's been 40 years since a Republican- controlled Congress had the opportunity to mark any milestones. But when Republicans became the majority party after all those years, we wasted no time in making history. As we approach the end of the first 100 days of the Republican Congress, I want to take a moment to offer my congratulations to House Speaker Newt Gingrich and the House Republican majority for their spectacular success with the Contract With America. In his 1992 campaign, Bill Clinton promised to start his administration with ``an explosive 100-day action period.'' Obviously, he had not met Newt Gingrich or a Republican Congress. Last November, the American people sent a powerful message to Washington. They told us they wanted a Government defined by its limit, not by its reach. They demanded a return to freedom and a renewal of opportunity. And they told us they were tired of Government promising too much, and delivering too little. From day one, the new Republican Congress demonstrated its commitment to something all too rare in this town--keeping our promises to the American people. On January 4, we rolled up our sleeves, and started turning the message from the people into action. They gave us the message on last November 8, and now we are turning it into action. Action is precisely what House Republicans provided with the Contract With America. They can be proud that they did what they said they would do--all ten initiatives were put to a vote, with dramatic, and often bipartisan, results. If people didn't already know that the Senate is a far different institution with different rules, they know now. At times, it seemed like the Democrat minority wanted to spend 100 days on every bill. But, despite all the filibusters and delays, the Senate also achieved what I believe will be seen as remarkable success. Instead of taking most of January off, we got right down to business. Like the House, we acted immediately to lead by example, forcing Congress to live under the same laws we apply to everyone else. President Clinton quickly signed this long overdue initiative. With a strong bipartisan majority, we approved S. 1, to stop Congress from passing unfunded mandates on to States and local governments, unless we send the money to pay for them. I'm proud to say that the unfunded mandates bill is now the law of the land, and has been signed by President Clinton. Again, leading by example, Senate and House Republicans put our budget cutting zeal to the test right here on Capitol Hill. Senate Republicans cut staff and overhead, reducing committee budgets by 15 percent. We voted to give the President the line-item veto, a long overdue tool in our efforts to rein in Government. To bring real discipline to Federal spending, the House approved the balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Regrettably, the Senate fell one vote short. But, we're not giving up, and we hope one of our colleagues, will understand, if we are going to have the discipline and force the Congress to make these tough decisions, the balanced budget amendment is very, very important. And I must say I welcome anyone who wanted to be converted on that issue because I think it is critical. To me it is sort of the centerpiece of all the efforts we are making on both sides of the aisle. It is not a partisan issue. There is a new poll out today indicating that 78 percent of the American people support the balanced budget amendment. I believe they understand probably better than we do that we need the discipline. We need to be able to say to people, Oh, we cannot do that. It is a great idea, but we have a constitutional amendment now for a balanced budget and we cannot start a lot of new programs, which start low and end up in the millions and billions of dollars. So it is my hope that, before this Congress ends, the balanced budget amendment will be before the States for ratification. It seems to me that is very, very important. Then just last night, we made a very important downpayment on deficit reduction by cutting $16 billion in unnecessary Government spending-- not over 5 years. The President advocated $16 billion over 5 years. This year it is $16 billion in the Senate bill and $17 billion in the House version. They will go to conference when we return after the recess. My view is that we will have a very tough but a very fair spending reduction proposal to send to the President. I hope that he will see fit to sign it. We acted swiftly to ease burdens on working Americans, and those who create jobs and opportunities. We restored the tax deduction for more than 3 million self-employed Americans for the cost of health insurance premiums. We eased burdens on job-created businesses by approving the Paperwork Reduction Act. And we took an important first step in regulatory reform by approving a 45-day congressional review of excessive regulations which cost America money and jobs. The Republican Congress' first 100 days stand in stark contrast to the first 100 days of the Clinton administration. Instead of an explosive action period, President Clinton's first 100 days in office will be remembered for big Government policy bombs, such as the biggest tax increase in American history, including retroactive tax increases and tax hikes on Social Security recipients, and a misguided, unpaid- for stimulus package that would have added billions to the deficit Americans are demanding we control. And in 1995, while Republicans were reining in Government during our first 100 days, the Clinton administration was at it again, producing a budget that gave up on trying to ever balance the Nation's books. And the President protected Washington's chronic wild spending by fighting the balanced budget amendment, and the will of the American people. The good news is, during the next 100 days, the Republican Congress is determined to protect our children, grandchildren, and future generations of Americans by producing a budget plan that will lead to balance budget by 2002. It would be a lot easier if we had that one more vote on the Democratic side, and I do not think anyone in this Chamber would think that it would make it much easier for us to do that if we had that discipline. I really believe that someone will see the light, I hope. Mr. President, while the focus during the past 100 days has been on the House--and rightfully so--I believe the next 100 days will belong to the Senate, probably maybe the next 100 nights, too. There will be fewer recesses on the Senate side. The House is going out for 3 weeks. We are going out for 2 weeks. We have to catch up. I do not quarrel with that because the Founding Fathers realized that they needed one body that could move very quickly. They wanted another Chamber where they would be more deliberate and certainly nobody can argue the point that we are very deliberate. In fact, we deliberate and deliberate and deliberate sometimes. We are not setting any deadlines. And no one expects the Senate to be a rubberstamp for the House. But we will continue to be guided by the common principles of reining in Government, returning power to the people and expanding opportunity. It is my hope that the Senate will address many of the following issues, putting the budget on a path to balance: welfare reform. That is a big issue, not partisan. It is bipartisan, as it should be. The President says he supports welfare reform; cutting taxes for families. There will be a tax cut, a substantial tax cut measure passed in the Senate; reforming our legal system, regulatory reform, tough anticrime measures, voting on term limits and protecting U.S. interests in U.N. peacekeeping. Mr. President, on January 4, I walked across the Capitol to the floor of the House because I had never had the privilege of seeing a Republican Speaker. Now I have, and I know I speak for all of my Republican colleagues when I say I like the change. Tonight, Speaker Gingrich will report to the Nation on the historic first 100 days of the Republican Congress. I look forward to watching, and I look forward to tackling the important work that remains ahead. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DOLE

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent there be 30 minutes for debate on the Dole amendment to be equally divided in the usual form and that no amendments be in order during the pendency of the Dole-Daschle amendment.

Mr. DOLE. Is anybody entitled to time on the managers' amendment, or are the managers entitled to time?

Mr. DOLE. Wherever.

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, the Senator can have 5 minutes; 10 in opposition, and take 5.

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I still hope we can work this out. We were about that close, or closer. The Democratic leader and the Republican leader worked throughout the day with other Senators on both sides. We thought we had an agreement. We thought we had an agreement. I still hope it is possible to get the agreement. If that happens, we could finish our work very quickly today and there would be no votes tomorrow or Saturday. But if not, then I do not think we have any other choice other than to try to complete this bill tonight with or without cloture. So I still think there is a genesis of an agreement here. I would say to the White House, I hope that you will help us reach an agreement, because, until there is an agreement, there will not be any defense supplemental taken up in this body.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me indicate to the distinguished Democratic leader, who is on the floor, it is still my hope that we can reach some agreement. It seems to me we are not that far apart. We ought to be able to do it. I am certainly prepared to sit down with the Democratic leader, or anyone else, if there is a problem. But, just in case we cannot work it out, then I have filed a cloture motion, because I do think it is important that we finish this bill so we can take up the defense supplemental bill and some other things after that. But I am prepared and I think the Democratic leader is prepared and, hopefully, our colleagues are prepared. It seems to me we have one of two choices. Either we try to finish this tonight with no votes tomorrow, or we will be here tonight and tomorrow and maybe Saturday. But, that is up to our colleagues. I cannot believe any of these amendments are so critical they cannot wait until the next supplemental or until the appropriations bills start arriving. I think there was a lot of give and take on each side in good faith. I thought we were almost there. But if we make an agreement and everybody says, ``Well, I will make the agreement but I want to go back and offer an amendment to try to undo the agreement,'' then we do not have an agreement. Either we have an agreement or we do not have an agreement. I can agree, if you let me have 25 chances to improve on what I have already agreed upon, but I do not think that is an agreement. I hope that we can resolve everything so that, when it comes to the floor, I can persuade the Senator from New York to withdraw the amendment with reference to Mexico. He has not done that yet. We have the Jordan aid in this package that I know the administration is very concerned about. So I hope there would be some way to bring it together in the next, say, 45 minutes to an hour. I also remind my colleagues on this side of the aisle, there is a Republican conference in progress in S. 207 which will end, hopefully, at 3 o'clock. I am happy to yield the floor or yield to my colleague from South Dakota. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE. Will the Senator yield? We are prepared to vote on the amendment of the Senator from Massachusetts. I do not think we need any additional debate on that. I am for it, not that it makes any difference.

Mr. DOLE. While the minority leader is checking, I suggest the absence of a quorum.