Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, what I am going to do here is obtain the consent on the farm bill so that we maybe can vote on final passage tomorrow at 4:45. So let me start that consent. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Craig be recognized to modify amendment No. 3184 with permanent law provisions, and once that modification has been made, no amendments be in order to strike the permanent law modification during the pendency of S. 1541.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Further, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that it not be in order to offer any amendment or motion relative to health care portability or similar to the text contained in S. 1028 prior to the execution of this agreement.

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I also ask unanimous consent that not prior to April 15, but no later than May 3, the majority leader, after consultation with the Democratic leader, turn to the consideration of Calendar No. 205, S. 1028, the Health Insurance Reform Act of 1995.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hutchison. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. We will have to decide. I will let the Democratic leader know whether we will have another cloture vote on Thursday. But I think it is pretty obvious that had our absentees been here, we would have had cloture, and we have pretty good bipartisan support. It seems to me that we are pretty close to a bipartisan resolution of this matter. I will let my colleagues know as soon as we can because I know some have plans and some would like to have plans. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the vote was 59 to 34. That would be short. Right?

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. We are about to get an agreement on the cloture vote here.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I thank the Senator from Illinois. I want Members to know I have had a brief visit with the distinguished Democratic leader, Senator Daschle. We have now asked staff on each side to see if they can sit down and work out a series of amendments on each side on the farm bill and work into the evening and work tomorrow and set a time certain for action on something, say 6 o'clock. That means we would have, if there is an agreement--we do not have it yet, we just started--so if there is an agreement, then there would be votes tonight, there would be votes tomorrow. It is my hope that part of that agreement, if in fact one is reached, would be a recess period until the 26th of February, because many, including many of the staff in the Senate, have been here right around the clock through the Christmas holidays and New Year's. In any event, that is all we can advise our colleagues at this time. If we have any additional information, we will pass it on. So I cannot put out the no-vote signs. There could be votes tonight. We will let you know as soon as we can. Mr. GRAMS addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I understand a resolution I am about to offer has been cleared on each side. I send it to the desk.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, 16 years ago, America was flat on her back. Our economy was a disaster. The only things up were inflation, interest rates, and unemployment--all in or near double digits. Abroad, our resolve was questioned by our allies and doubted by our adversaries. Many so-called experts--including some in the Government--surveyed the situation, wrung their hands, shook their heads, and pronounced that the United States was in decline: That our best days were far behind us. But one man knew better. And that man was Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan knew that power belonged with the people, not with the Government. He knew that the best solutions to our problems came not from bureaucrats on the Potomac, but from men and women on the Mississippi, the Colorado, and the Columbia. Ronald Reagan knew that economic recovery could be achieved not through regulations and redtape, but by allowing the magic of the marketplace to work its wonders. Ronald Reagan knew that America was right far more often than she was wrong. Ronald Reagan knew that military strength was not the means to war, but the key to peace. Ronald Reagan knew that world respect came not from appeasement, but from standing by your friends, by speaking up for freedom, and by drawing the line against dictators. Ronald Reagan knew that America was still a shining city on a hill, and that our Nation's best days were truly yet to come. It was this vision that Ronald Reagan presented in 1980 and 1984. It was this vision that the voters approved in overwhelming margins. It was this vision that brought hope and opportunity to millions. It was this vision that revitalized America, and changed the world. Mr. President, next Tuesday is Ronald Reagan's 85th birthday. And the resolution we pass today will extend to President Reagan the greetings and best wishes of the U.S. Senate. And I know I speak for all Members of the Senate, when I say that our thoughts and prayers are with the President and Nancy.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, if I could have the attention of my colleagues, I ask that the cloture vote be postponed. Let me indicate what we believe is in progress. We have been working for the last 2 or 3 hours with a number of Members on each side of the aisle and with Chairman Lugar and the ranking member, Senator Leahy, on the Senate Agriculture Committee. I am not certain if there is an agreement yet, but we may be close to an agreement. We think it would save a considerable amount of time if we could suspend it temporarily. I understand the Democrats have a conference at 5:30.

Mr. DOLE. I know a number of Members have other engagements. I will be in a position, maybe by 6 o'clock, to indicate whether we have an agreement or do not have an agreement. If we do not have an agreement, we will vote on cloture. If we do have an agreement, we will try to get a time agreement and consider all amendments--en bloc?

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I can tell Members now that there will not be any votes for a while. We will try to give an a announcement at 6 o'clock. We hope we can have a short time agreement. If there is an agreement overall on the agriculture bill, we would not be here too late this evening. If not, we would have to come back tomorrow or sometime next week. So I say to my colleagues that we will let you know as soon as we have any information. And I appreciate your cooperation. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Let me repeat the request.

Mr. DOLE. I think the managers on each side of the aisle are here. We do not want to take a lot of time. We are trying to work out something on the agriculture bill, a bipartisan solution, if you please. Senator Lugar, Senator Leahy, and others on both sides have been active. We had a meeting in Senator Daschle's office, including myself, Senator Daschle, Senator Leahy, and Senator Lugar. We believe there can be a resolution. But rather than keep people here late, late tonight, we would like to move ahead and have the debate on the telecommunications conference report. I understand that is agreeable to the Senators from South Dakota and South Carolina. I think there is a need to get consent on the other side of the aisle before we can proceed. There is no time limit. We hope to get an hour or two for a time limit. We said we cannot get that at the present time. But we would like to ask consent--I will not make the request now, but if we can get it cleared, I would simply ask consent that, notwithstanding the absence of official papers, the Senate now turn to the consideration of the conference report to accompany S. 652, the telecommunications bill, and the conference report be considered read. That would just permit us to go ahead and have the debate. I ask unanimous consent, notwithstanding the absence of official papers----

Mr. DOLE. I have not made the request yet. I will repeat what I said and make the request.

Mr. DOLE. Yes.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, we are on the verge of passing the most important piece of legislation in this Congress. By unleashing competition in the communications industry, America will have more jobs, a stronger economy, and more opportunity. It is a real economic stimulus package with one big difference: It relies on private-sector America, and not big government. Mr. President, this bill has been in the works for over a decade. It has stumped Congress after Congress. I know that because I introduced the first deregulation bill after the breakup of the old ``Ma Bell'' system back in 1986, 10 years ago. There is no doubt about it. This conference report was crafted in a bipartisan, I think nonpartisan, manner. It could not have been accomplished without the hard work of Chairman Pressler and his staff. Senator Hollings has played a key role for years on this important issue. I want to say an additional word about Senator Pressler. I know the committee chairman sometimes gets a little anxious and comes to the leader quite often about, ``When are you going to take up my bill?'' And I can report that I did not get by one day without Senator Pressler asking me that at least two or three times. So I want to congratulate Senator Pressler for his dogged determination. I am very proud of the work he has done and the work of the other Members in the conference. We have some differences. We think there are still some things that should be addressed. I am satisfied with the letter which I have received from the FCC with reference to spectrum. I do not have any desire to put a roadblock in the way of the spectrum option. But I wish to make certain the taxpayers get their money's worth. If it is not worth anything, that is fine. Let us have public hearings. Let us get it all out in the open. Let us make a decision, and then let us make that determination. I am proud of the fact that this bill willl pass in a Republican Congress. It is no small feat. It was only 3 years ago Congress reregulated the cable TV industry. That is not to say that cable TV did not have its problems, because it certainly did. The difference is Republicans believe competition and not Government is the best regulator of the marketplace. Competition also means more choices for the American people. And choice provides the highest level of consumer protection. It has been a tough bill to put together and some issues were resolved and some were not resolved. Important issues like the foreign ownership provision that were dropped, they would have helped American corporations pry open foreign markets that have been closed for too long. Or maybe it was the relaxation of the broadcast ownership rule which would have given the little guy access to capital and thereby be a stronger competitor. There could have also been language included that would have forbidden the FCC from regulating the Internet. At the same time, we did take steps to help parents protect their children from indecent material that is prevalent on this new service. I do not mean to take anything away from the bill and how it will propel our country into the next century. Instead, I wish to point out there is still much to be done. I think everybody has agreed to that. I have also been openly critical of the provision in the telecommunications bill that would junk all television sets in the country and create a giant welfare program for television broadcasters. I have worked closely with Chairman Pressler, who has also been critical of this issue for some time, Senator McCain, the Speaker, and many others. So we have the letter. I am satisfied with it. They said, in any event, they would not be prepared until 1997, and it seems to me we are not going to retard progress in any way. We are just going to find out what the facts are. If it is worth $10 billion, $20 billion, $30 billion, $70 billion, or zero, the public will know after public hearings. We think the American taxpayers are entitled to at least that assurance. When we are talking about reducing the rate of growth of certain programs--Medicaid, Medicare, welfare--we ought to make certain we are not going at the bottom and giving somebody at the top a windfall. And again maybe someday, if we live long enough, this may be covered by the networks, the spectrum. I doubt it. They will be covering Members of Congress who might be going overseas on important business. But it could be that they might cover this, how much it is worth to them and how much it is worth to broadcasting generally. I think it should happen. There should not be a double standard is what they keep telling us. I agree with them. So I expect we would have objective reporting on this particular issue. Today we secured a letter signed by all five Commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission. These Commissioners stood with me, despite intense lobbying to do otherwise. That is courage and we owe them our thanks. In that letter, these Commissioners committed to Congress, Any award of initial licenses or construction permits for advanced television services will only be made in compliance with the express intent of Congress and only pursuant to additional legislation it may resolving this issue. I am determined to turn the FCC's commitment to us into a victory for the American taxpayer. But Congress will conduct hearings in the full light of day on this issue. We will follow through and address this issue. For those who think this is an idle threat, guess again. Because we will give this our utmost scrutiny. Now, those may sound like tough words, but, Mr. President, taxpayers deserve nothing less. In closing, let me also assure those skeptics that these letters are not--I repeat, are not--about saving face. It is about saving the American taxpayer billions of dollars and stopping a give-away, a giant corporate welfare program. Mr. President, despite this profound flaw, which we will fix, this legislation will create jobs and benefits that we yet cannot imagine. I ask unanimous consent that the FCC letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the conference report was agreed to.

Mr. DOLE. That is correct.

Mr. DOLE. Yes.

Mr. DOLE. The Senator from Idaho is correct. I am aware that he has worked to represent the interests of State and local governments to assure that there is no unfunded mandates impact on them in this bill.

Mr. DOLE

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. President, the plaintiff in a child support controversy pending in California Superior Court has requested that a former caseworker for Senator William V. Roth, Jr., submit a declaration for use in that proceeding. The plaintiff, who resides in Delaware, obtained assistance from Senator Roth's office in aid of her efforts to obtain child support. The substance of telephone conversations between Senator Roth's caseworker and the Monterey County District Attorney's office, which has responsibility in child support matters in California, has become an issue in the case, as a contention has been made that Senator Roth's caseworker had authority to speak for the constituent regarding proposed settlement of the case. Senator Roth's former caseworker has informed the plaintiff's attorney to the contrary that she never sought to convey to the District Attorney instructions about settling the case or represented herself as authorized to speak for the constituent in approving a settlement. Senator Roth's believes that it is appropriate for his former caseworker to submit a declaration describing her conversations with the District Attorney's office to ensure that the Court is accurately informed about the limited role played by his office. Mr. President, this resolution would authorize Senator Roth's former caseworker to submit a declaration in this matter.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, earlier this year, the Senate agreed to Senate Resolution 114, referring to the Court of Federal Claims S. 740, a private bill for the relief of a computer software firm, INSLAW, Inc., and its owners, William A. and Nancy Burke Hamilton. The purpose of the referral was to obtain a report from the court about allegations that the Department of Justice appropriated computer software developed by the INSLAW firm without paying for it and whether INSLAW has legitimate legal or equitable claims against the government arising out of its contractual relations with the government. Some of the matters at issue in this congressional referral case were earlier the subject of an inquiry by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. As part of the civil discovery plan that the parties are undertaking under the court's supervision in this case, the plaintiffs' counsel has written to the leadership of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations seeking access to evidence obtained by the subcommittee in the course of its inquiry on subjects covered by the congressional referral. In Senate Resolution 302 of the 102d Congress, the Senate authorized the Investigations Subcommittee to provide evidence from its inquiry to a Justice Department special counsel conducting an earlier investigation into these matters. The leadership of the Subcommittee would like to assist the court by responding to the plaintiffs' request for relevant evidence from its investigation. Such assistance appears particularly warranted in this matter inasmuch as this litigation results from a referral initiated by the Senate. Mr. President, this resolution would authorize the Investigations Subcommittee, acting through its chairman and ranking member, to provide copies of relevant investigative records to the plaintiffs, with copies to the Justice Department, in response to this request.