Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, today I am introducing a joint resolution which salutes and congratulates Polish people around the world on the occasion of the 205th anniversary of the Polish Constitution. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Simon, Abraham, Moseley-Braun, Murkowski, Mikulski, Helms, Roth, Santorum, and Lugar. This resolution is being introduced today in the House by Congressman Jack Quinn of New York and a number of bipartisan cosponsors. Poland is one of America's oldest and closest friends. Many of its sons and daughters have crossed the ocean to our shores over the past 200 years. Indeed, from the very birth of our great nation we have benefited from the talent and dedication of the Polish people. When we fought for our independence, Thaddeus Kosciuszko--a native son of Poland--fought alongside General Washington. Today, memorials to Kosciuszko's courage, military skill, and genuine friendship, can be found in our Capital and in many cities across the United States. Following the War of Independence, Kosciuszko carried back to Poland the American concept of constitutional democracy. Poland's 1791 Constitution was the first constitution in Central and Eastern Europe to secure individual and religious freedom for all persons. It also formed a government much like ours, composed of distinct legislative, executive, and judicial powers. I would like to quote from the Polish Constitution which declares, ``All power in civil society should be derived from the will of the people.'' Tragically, this Constitution was only in effect for less than 2 years. However, its principles endured for 2 centuries. And over the last 5 years--since the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact--Poland has finally realized the promise of freedom and democracy held in the 1791 Constitution. So, on May 3, 1996, when the citizens of Poland celebrate the 205th anniversary of the adoption of Poland's first Constitution, we want them to know that the United States Congress shares in their celebration. No doubt, all across our 50 States, Polish-Americans will be celebrating and taking pride in their rich heritage. This joint resolution salutes and congratulates all Polish people, wherever they may now reside, on this great and historic occasion. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the joint resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Yes. Amendment No. 3682 (Purpose: To reauthorize and expand the healthy start program to target areas in need and to implement community driven strategies to reduce infant mortality)

Mr. DOLE. Oh, yes. I think there is only one additional vote. I believe this will be the last vote.

Mr. DOLE. Let me encourage my colleagues, if there is an opportunity to work these out on either side, we hope we can do that and not require a rollcall vote. If you are going to work out your amendment and it is accepted without rollcall votes, I will look very kindly on those amendments. I will be a conferee.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I think the distinguished Democratic leader wanted to add a word.

Mr. DOLE. I am satisfied with that. I think it is a good idea.

Mr. DOLE. How many from the Senator from Massachusetts?

Mr. DOLE. So that will be two votes?

Mr. DOLE. We can stack three or four votes back to back, accept the rest of them, and have final passage.

Mr. DOLE. Yes.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I think we are making progress. I wonder if the managers might be able to identify those amendments that would require rollcall votes and have the debate on those amendments, and then we can advise our other colleagues that did not have amendments that we would probably be voting, say, at 10 o'clock or 9:30, or whatever it might be. That would save everybody from having to stay on the floor. When you stay on the floor, sometimes you get excited and talk.

Mr. DOLE. En bloc?

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, today I am introducing a joint resolution which salutes and congratulates Polish people around the world on the occasion of the 205th anniversary of the Polish Constitution. I am pleased to be joined by Senators Simon, Abraham, Moseley-Braun, Murkowski, Mikulski, Helms, Roth, Santorum, and Lugar. This resolution is being introduced today in the House by Congressman Jack Quinn of New York and a number of bipartisan cosponsors. Poland is one of America's oldest and closest friends. Many of its sons and daughters have crossed the ocean to our shores over the past 200 years. Indeed, from the very birth of our great nation we have benefited from the talent and dedication of the Polish people. When we fought for our independence, Thaddeus Kosciuszko--a native son of Poland--fought alongside General Washington. Today, memorials to Kosciuszko's courage, military skill, and genuine friendship, can be found in our Capital and in many cities across the United States. Following the War of Independence, Kosciuszko carried back to Poland the American concept of constitutional democracy. Poland's 1791 Constitution was the first constitution in Central and Eastern Europe to secure individual and religious freedom for all persons. It also formed a government much like ours, composed of distinct legislative, executive, and judicial powers. I would like to quote from the Polish Constitution which declares, ``All power in civil society should be derived from the will of the people.'' Tragically, this Constitution was only in effect for less than 2 years. However, its principles endured for 2 centuries. And over the last 5 years--since the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact--Poland has finally realized the promise of freedom and democracy held in the 1791 Constitution. So, on May 3, 1996, when the citizens of Poland celebrate the 205th anniversary of the adoption of Poland's first Constitution, we want them to know that the United States Congress shares in their celebration. No doubt, all across our 50 States, Polish-Americans will be celebrating and taking pride in their rich heritage. This joint resolution salutes and congratulates all Polish people, wherever they may now reside, on this great and historic occasion. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the joint resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Obviously, I would have no objection to that. I will modify the request to say the vote occur not later than 3:45 p.m., and that any time between the time we start the debate on that motion and 3:45 p.m. be equally divided.

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 that the cloture vote with respect to the Special Committee to Investigate Whitewater be vitiated.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. The Senator has correctly stated the understandings on both sides of the aisle as I see it at this time. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I understand Senator D'Amato and Senator Sarbanes may want to speak briefly. Mr. D'AMATO addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, is leader time reserved?

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. In fact, I think we have had one. Senator Pressler, chairman of the Commerce Committee, had 1 day of hearings. There will be another day of hearings, I think, next week to be followed by additional hearings. So there is an effort to have everybody come in and testify and then make a judgment. I see the Senator from South Dakota is on the floor now. That was part of the agreement on the telecommunications bill--that the bill would go forward, there would be hearings, and Congress would make a judgment for the American people. We are going to have to cough up the money on what we should do.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, TV broadcasters have broken their trust with the American people. For more than 40 years, the American people have generously lent TV station owners our Nation's airwaves for free. Now some broadcasters want more and will stop at nothing to get it. They are bullying Congress and running a multimillion- dollar scare campaign to mislead the public. The reason is simple: Why pay for something when you can get it for free? But there is one small problem. The airwaves are the Nation's most valuable natural resource and are worth billions and billions of dollars. They do not belong to the broadcasters. They do not belong to the phone companies. They do not belong to the newspapers. Each and every wave belongs to the American people, the American taxpayers. Our airwaves are just as much a national resource as our national parks. Enter the TV broadcasters. Earlier this year, I blocked their legislative efforts to get spectrum for free. At my request, Congress is now holding open hearings on reforming our spectrum policies. Apparently, the democratic process is not good enough for most broadcasters. So TV broadcasters are now running ads and so-called public service announcements, claiming that TV will die without this huge corporate welfare program, this billions and billions of dollars they want to take away from the American taxpayers. Of course, they do not call this giveaway welfare; they call it a tax. Imagine calling a giveaway a tax. Also, I am aware that some broadcasters have asked Members of Congress to drop by their stations. In the midst of these friendly discussions, the broadcasters say, ``I thought you might want to see the ad we are considering running in your district.'' So much for subtlety. It seems to me the broadcasters should be happy with the deal they already have. They have been getting free channels for years. In return, they fulfill public interest obligations, such as reporting news and information. Now they want more airwaves for free. Newspapers also report the news, but Congress has never had to buy them off. It seems to me that giving broadcasters free spectrum is like giving newspapers free paper from our national forests. Congress has never challenged whether broadcasters should be allowed to keep a channel. Instead, we are simply stating that if broadcasters want more channels, then they are going to pay the taxpayers for them. That does not kill television. The broadcasters say they cannot afford to buy additional airwaves, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates is worth at least $12 billion. Last time I checked, the American people cannot afford to give it to them free. We are trying to balance a budget with tax cuts for families with children, reducing spending, and closing loopholes. Broadcasters say that if they had to pay for the extra airwaves, it would be the end of so-called free, over-the-air television. The facts speak otherwise. According to the Washington Post, over the last 2 years broadcast deals in the private sector amounted to a whooping $31.3 billion. That is with a ``b''--billion dollars. Here is another fact. All TV broadcast licenses in America were originally given away for free, but only 6 percent are still in the hands of the original licensee. The other 94 percent have been bought and sold. My point is that broadcasters have a long history of paying top dollar for existing channels. Somehow they cannot afford any new ones unless the taxpayer picks up the tab. unfunded mandate on consumers Before Congress lets huge moneyed interests get their fingers on this national resource, we must be certain that the American taxpayer is fully protected. The policy broadcasters' want will not only force taxpayers to giveaway valuable airwaves, it will also force consumers to spend hundreds of billions of their own dollars on new equipment which is a point that I think has been overlooked. They have been trying to frighten everybody with television, and to get their way are going to have to have another television or some attachment. The fact is that federally mandating a transition to digital broadcast will ultimately render all television sets in the country obsolete. You will not be able to use your television set. Consumers will be forced to buy either new television sets or convertor boxes to receive so-called free, over-the-air broadcasts. Last year we passed the unfunded mandates law. Perhaps some have forgotten, but that law applies to more than just State and local governments. It applies to the private sector and most importantly to individuals. The impact of the broadcasters' plan would be dramatic. There are 222 million television sets in this country. At a Senate Budget Committee hearing last month, the broadcasters testified that the average digital television set's estimated cost is $1,500, while the less expensive converter box will cost approximately $500. Replacing every television set in America with a digital one would cost $333 billion. Using the less expensive converter box would cost $111 billion. No doubt about it, consumers will not be happy that Congress made this choice for them. That is precisely what we are going to do here unless we wake up and smell something. The American people should have a say before Congress makes a decision on spectrum. After all, the airwaves are theirs and so are their TV sets. Neither belongs to the broadcasters.

Mr. DOLE. I am happy to yield.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, since the report surfaced in the Los Angeles Times that President Clinton decided to allow Iran to provide arms to the Bosnians, there has been little, if any, response from the other side of the aisle. Had there been a Republican in the White House, no doubt, the Democrats would have been all over the President. But, that is not the real issue. I am not here to be all over the President. This is not about the conduct of partisan politics, but the conduct of our foreign policy. This is about American leadership, American credibility, and Congressional oversight. That is why I met today with the chairmen of the Foreign Relations, Intelligence, Armed Services, and Judiciary Committees to discuss this serious foreign policy matter. For nearly 3 years, this administration opposed congressional efforts to lift the unjust and illegal arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina. We were told, and the American people were told, that the United States was bound by the U.N. embargo on the former Yugoslavia. We were told that if America violated this embargo, we would lose support from our allies for other embargoes, such as the one against Iraq. Finally, we were told that lifting the embargo and allowing the Bosnians to have arms while U.N. forces were deployed in Bosnia, would endanger the troops of our allies. Some people are saying, well, you knew that Iran was providing arms to the Bosnians. I would like to respond to that. While we read and heard reports that Iran was smuggling arms to the Bosnians, we did not know the President and his advisers made a conscious decision to give a green light for Iran to provide arms. Indeed, those of us who advocated lifting the arms embargo--Republicans and Democrats--argued that if America did not provide Bosnia with assistance, Iran would be Bosnia's only option. In my view, the role of the President and administration officials in this matter need to be examined--even if we do not receive cooperation from the White House and the Intelligence Oversight Board-- which has been the case to date. In the meeting I held with the four committee chairmen today, we decided on the approach we would take. The Intelligence Committee will investigate the matter of whether any administration officials were engaged in covert action. The Foreign Relations Committee will review administration policy as stated and as executed, as well as the ramifications of these revelations. Let me tell you why I believe this examination is important. In short, this duplicitous policy has seriously damaged our credibility with our allies. It has also produced one of the most serious threats to our military forces in Bosnia and, according to the administration, the main obstacle to the arm and train program for the Bosnians--I am talking about the presence of Iranian military forces and intelligence officials in Bosnia. As I have said many, many times on this floor, along with many of my colleagues on the other side, had we lifted the arms embargo and had we provided the weapons, the Bosnians could have defended themselves and chances are there would not have been any American troops there now, and we would have had a peace agreement sooner and on better terms for the Bosnians. And most likely, as I said, we would not have 20,000 Americans in Bosnia at this moment. And finally, had we lifted the arms embargo on Bosnia, the United States would have done the right thing for the right reason. We would have done it openly, and we would have done it honestly. That is what this examination and these hearings will be about, because I think we owe it to the American people and we owe it to Members of Congress. As far as I know, no one knew about what was happening. We were told we just could not lift the arms embargo because of all the problems that would create with our allies and our credibility at the same time. Apparently some knew it was happening through the back door. I yield back the remainder of my leader time. Mr. HOLLINGS addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I yield the floor.