Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, throughout this Congress, a great deal of discussion has been devoted to a review of existing agencies and functions. The budget resolution and the Department of Transportation appropriations bill called for the elimination of the Interstate Commerce Commission. S. 1396 sunsets the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal Maritime Commission and creates a new intermodal board within the Department of Transportation. I believe S. 1396 has taken the right steps to provide for reform while retaining a competitive atmosphere for railroad, motor carrier, and shipping industries. I have been a strong proponent over the years for rail reform that provides an atmosphere for a strong rail industry as well as retaining a competitive balance for small shippers. I am particularly concerned about the impact of changes upon small shippers, including the small grain handlers, shippers and processors of Kansas and the Midwest. The legislation before us retains important provisions that have been provided in the past to small shippers while reducing unnecessary regulatory requirements. I believe S. 1396 more adequately addresses the concern of small shippers by providing common carrier obligations, protections on agriculture contracting authority, notice procedures for rate increases, and abandonment procedures. In addition, protections are provided for individuals who lose their jobs due to mergers or acquisitions. For these reasons, S. 1396 has gained bipartisan support and deserves passage. The railroad industry is going through some interesting times. The Burlington Northern/Santa Fe merger coupled with the proposed Union Pacific/Southern Pacific merger has created concern about the impact of these mergers on shippers. Shippers face unique challenges as railroads merge, creating less options and uncertain futures. Under these circumstances, it becomes increasingly important to ensure an atmosphere where economically viable competition is allowed to exist. The mergers being proposed are of great concern for several States, including Kansas. I believe these mergers can accomplish a strong base for the various industries and small businesses they serve, however, the impacts of the merger must be closely monitored. The reduction in the overall number of railroads should not mean a reduction in services to those who depend on these services the most. I would like to thank Senator Pressler and Senator Exon for their efforts on this legislation and urge your support.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, thousands of concerned citizens all across America are now joining the chorus of voices speaking out against an entertainment industry that too often glorifies mindless violence, and peddles its harmful wares relentlessly to our children. These citizens understand, as I do, that images of senseless violence--repeated over and over again and showing murder in ever more graphic detail--debase our culture and affect people's attitudes and conduct, especially the attitudes and conduct of our impressionable young. Regrettably, a shocking incident reported in today's New York Daily News, New York Post, and New York Times seems to confirm the accuracy of this observation. This past Sunday, two men squirted a bottle of flammable liquid into a token booth at a subway station in Brooklyn's Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood. They then lit a match, igniting an inferno that blew the token booth apart and sprayed broken glass and splintered wood throughout the subway station. Trapped inside the token booth at the time of the explosion was its operator, 50-year-old Harry Kaufman, who miraculously survived with his life but who nonetheless suffered second- and third-degree burns over nearly 80 percent of his body. Mr. Kaufman normally works only weeknights, but made the fateful decision to work the overtime shift on Sunday because he was trying to save money to send his son to college. This incident--committed by two men whose depravity is beyond description--is remarkably similar to incidents depicted in a new movie called ``The Money Train,'' produced by Columbia Pictures. Although I have not personally seen ``The Money Train''--and after Sunday's subway attack I have no intention of patronizing it--the movie apparently contains two scenes that occurred nearly identical to the one that occurred in Brooklyn on Sunday. In the movie, a pyromaniac named ``Torch'' squirts flammable liquid through the slot in the token booth and then ignites the booth. Unlike Mr. Kaufman, the fictional token- booth operator escapes unscathed from the ensuing explosion. Are ``The Money Train'' scenes and the real-life tragedy in Brooklyn just a coincidence? Perhaps. But, apparently, this is not the view of New York City Police Commissioner William Bratton, who says, ``There seems to be some connection between the movie and the explosions.'' Or as Alan Kiepper, the head of New York's Transit Authority, points out: ``We know from experience that when you get movie and television depictions of criminal activity, it is often copycatted.'' Copycat or no copycat, the individuals who committed this unspeakable act must be held accountable for their crimes. We are all responsible for own actions. To say that a movie caused this senseless act in Brooklyn gives it a logic and dignity it does not deserve and cannot have. There can be no excuses for criminal behavior, whatever the motivation may or may not be. But, at the same time, those who work in Hollywood's corporate suites must also be willing to accept their share of the blame. For those in the entertainment industry, who too often engage in pornography or violence as a way to sell movie tickets, it is time for some serious soul-searching. Is this how they want to make their livelihoods? Is this their contribution to society? Those who continue to deny that cultural messages can and do bore deep into the hearts and minds of our young people are deceiving themselves and ignoring reality. They are ignoring what happened this past June when a group of teenagers killed a Massachusetts man claiming they were natural born killers. And, yes, they are ignoring the senseless act that occurred this past Sunday morning in Brooklyn. In fact, news reports indicate that transit authority officials had reviewed ``The Money Train'' script before the movie was filmed and had objected to the token-booth arson scenes. The film's producers decided to create the scenes anyway--on Los Angeles soundstages. We may never know the true impact of this decision. Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity to convey my thoughts and [[Page S 17529]] prayers to Mr. Kaufman and his family. We wish him a speedy recovery. And we wish the New York City Police Department every success in their efforts to track down the vicious thugs who have committed this cowardly act. The American people have a right to voice their outrage, and they can do so not through calls for government censorship, but by derailing ``The Money Train'' at the box office. Just so you get a better picture of what happened, this is the Daily News, the front page of the Daily News. It is just entitled ``Torched.'' So, when you put a flammable liquid into that little token booth and light a match to it, with no real way to escape, this is what happens. The front page says, ``Attack mimics the hit movie `Money Train,' Token clerk firebombed in booth, Family and (transit authority) assail film thriller.'' Then in the New York Post pretty much the same. ``Torched! Gun-toting firebombers steal scene from movie to blow up token booth.'' I know, if there is any--maybe the paper is wrong. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe most Americans are wrong. But if someone out there is watching a movie and is taken by it and excited by it and says, ``I would like to try it,'' and then goes out to try it in real life, this is the result--burns over 80 percent of his body. Keep in mind he was working the overtime shift so he could earn a little extra money to send his son to college. The same coverage is in part B of the New York Times, same kind of coverage, same broad coverage. But on the inside page here it says, ``TA Worker Hurt In Booth Inferno.'' ``Two are sought in `movie' stunt.'' ``Train film's on fast track.'' It is all about what happens when people are mad and depraved or whatever. This is what happens. So I would just say to my colleagues, outrage is a powerful weapon. It is covered by the first amendment. The movie industry will tell you and the TV industry and all the others, ``Oh, this is the first amendment, right of free speech.'' We have also a right under the first amendment called ``outrage.'' And if the American people express their outrage, in my view, good things will happen. We do not need to pass legislation. We do not need censorship. We just need to alert the American people and to ask some of those--in this case Columbia Pictures--to accept some corporate responsibility, to be a good corporate citizen. I noted that Time Warner--we recently talked about that--has decided to sell off and has sold off Interscope, which is producing some of the CD's that you could not repeat anywhere, privately or in public or anywhere else. They were available to young people 10, 11, 12 years of age or younger, walking into any of these stores and buying the CD's. Those are the things that, in my view, I think make you wonder, where do you draw the line on profit? When does profit become greed? When does it stop, if it is harmful to society, particularly young people in America?

Mr. DOLE

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

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, just quickly on another matter, I will just say that tonight the President of the United States is going to deliver a very important message to the American people. He will attempt to persuade the American people that the United States, as a member of NATO, has a responsibility to commit 20,000 Americans to keep the peace or to enforce the peace--I think there is some confusion of exactly what it might be at this point--in that part of the world. The President talked to me, called me yesterday from Camp David. We had a good discussion. I said, ``Mr. President, you need to persuade the American people if you are to persuade Congress.'' I must say that it is difficult, particularly when this administration virtually sat on its hands the past 30 months while many of us talked about lifting the arms embargo. I still believe had we done that--and we had the debate on the Senate floor a number of times. We had strong bipartisan votes, Democrats joining Republicans, Republicans joining Democrats. The President indicated his opposition to that legislation. He said he would veto it. Now, it is always easy to second-guess. I am not trying to second- guess the President of the United States. But it seems to me, and many who are experts, that had we lifted the arms embargo 6 months, a year ago, we would not be talking about sending American forces to that part of the world, to Bosnia, to Tuzla, wherever the Americans will be stationed. Now, in my view the President has the authority and the power under the Constitution to do what he feels should be done regardless of what Congress does. But we also have a responsibility to our constituents and, I think, to the President of the United States to give him our best advice. So, I would guess that after the President makes his remarks and after the American people respond and after we finally have a signing of the peace agreement on December 15, is my understanding, that then the Congress will take some action. I am not certain what action that would be, because I think we need to consult with one another. I remember when President Bush asked a previous Congress to authorize the use of offensive force in the gulf crisis, not a single Member of the Democratic leadership in either the House or the Senate would support the President of the United States. But, fortunately, in the Senate there were 11 Democrats who stood with President Bush, and by a narrow margin, after the President rolled the dice, we prevailed. One thing I recall from that debate and the positive response after the vote was that the American people, once the Congress had given their--I do not say their stamp of approval, but at least authorized or backed up the President of the United States--as I recall, public approval for the operation rose rather significantly. So, I will just say to the President, I wish you well tonight. I think you have a difficult job. I think the rest of us should keep an open mind--not an empty mind, an open mind--an open mind, assuming we had the same responsibility, keeping in mind that those in the armed services are now volunteers. They are volunteers. And I assume when they volunteer they know that the good and the bad can happen. But they are still young and still Americans and they still have a right, perfectly understandably, as do their families, to know what risks will be taken, how long they may be there, what the costs may be, is there a vital national security interest and American national security interest, do we have an exit strategy, how long will they stay, how many, and many other questions on which I think we should focus. I will just say, it seems to me if I pick out one thing where I think the President can make a case, it is all these people came to America and they went to Dayton, OH, and they stayed there for a couple of weeks or longer, and they finally hammered out a fragile peace agreement and initialed it--it has not been signed yet--and initialed it, all under the auspices of American leadership--the President, the Secretary, the Assistant Secretary of State, Mr. Holbrook, and others-- and all this was premised on the fact that there would be 20,000 Americans there. So it seems to me the President may have at least laid some foundation, and there may be some obligation--some obligation-- obviously that we follow through on that agreement. But the agreement has not been signed finally. We have not heard from the American people. We have not heard from Congress. We have heard from the House where they, by a pretty good margin, indicate they want to cut off all funds. That bill has not yet been taken up in the Senate and it may not be taken up this week. I only hope that all of our colleagues will understand this is a very important decision all of us must make, and it must not be made just for today, but for next year and the next year and the next year. It is a question of Presidential authority, Presidential power, constitutional responsibility, and the responsibility of the Congress of the United States. So I look forward to listening carefully to the President tonight and wish him success. Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, for the information of my colleagues, there will be a period for morning business with Senators entitled to speak up to 10 minutes each. Today, we expect to adopt an adjournment resolution in time for the Senate to adjourn for Thanksgiving. It is possible the Senate may consider any legislative or executive items that have been cleared for action, but there will be no votes today. The House will not start voting until 5 o'clock this afternoon. Hopefully, they can have a near-unanimous vote on the resolution we passed yesterday to keep the Government going until December 15. If something should happen there, if there should be an amendment or something, we would be coming back an hour after that final disposition. I do not think that will happen, but we will have to leave that possibility open, just in the event there should be some other action on the House floor.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, the past few days have been historic ones in Washington, DC. As we approach Thanksgiving, I believe our children and our grandchildren will have a lot to be thankful for. They may not understand it. Maybe their parents will not understand it, maybe their grandparents will not understand it, but I do believe we have provided the leadership the American people have been waiting for, the leadership to do the most important thing we could ever do: pass a balanced budget for the first time in a generation. While President Clinton says he opposes our budget, last night the Republican majority reached an agreement with the White House, with the President and congressional Democrats to enact legislation before the end of this year to balance the budget by the year 2002 using honest economic estimates of the Congressional Budget Office, a balanced budget in 7 years. That is what this discussion has been all about. We have never lost sight, on our side of the aisle, of our principles. We are fighting for America's future. Some may not appreciate it, some may not understand it, but that is what the battle is all about. We would like to make budget deficits a thing of the past. And make no mistake about it, this is all about America's future, all about generations yet to come. This may be our--maybe not last, but one of our best opportunities to make fundamental change in the way we do business, the way the Government does business, so that our children will inherit something. Maybe they can inherit a dream rather than crushing debt. I think we owe all Americans an economy with lower interest rates so more people can buy a car, farm machinery, take out a college loan, or realize a lifetime dream of maybe buying a home. Believe me, if you look at the numbers--not my numbers but numbers from experts in the field--if, in fact, we have a balanced budget over 7 years, the markets will respond, interest rates will fall. It is like a tax cut. For every American it is like a big tax cut. If you pay less interest when you buy a car, buy a home, student loan, it is just as much money in your pocket as a tax cut would be. So, for the hard-working Americans, we owe it to them to do what we should do. We owe it to America's seniors to save Medicare from bankruptcy, just as we saved Social Security from bankruptcy in 1983 in a bipartisan way. President Reagan, a Republican, Tip O'Neill, Democratic Speaker of the House, and Howard Baker, Republican leader of the Senate, put together a commission--and I was honored to be on the commission with the likes of Claude Pepper of Florida, the champion of senior citizens, and many others--and, in a bipartisan way, we rescued Social Security from bankruptcy in 1983. I think we owe it to American families to give them back more of their [[Page S 17500]] own money--their money. I have repeated this story many times. We have a $500-per-child tax credit in the Republican plan. The President has $300 under a little different conditions. I met a man in Jacksonville, FL, who told me he had 10 children--10. He said, ``Ten times 500 is $5,000.'' And he said, ``Senator, I can spend that money better for my children than you or anybody else in Washington, DC.'' That is what the tax credit is all about. About 70 percent, nearly 80 percent of our total tax cuts go to families with children, or reduce the marriage penalty, or go to other areas we believe are family related. We also owe it to families who are trapped in the welfare system to create a new system based on work and hope and opportunity. We believe we have a good plan--I think the Senate bill which passed, as I recall 87 to 12, it would have been 88 to 12 but Senator Hatfield was unavoidably absent that day--and we are going to change welfare as we know it. It is going to be helpful to those who must rely on welfare. We are going to send it back to the States. I just finished talking to the Republican Governors, by satellite, in New Hampshire. They are excited about the prospect. Let them make the decisions. They are excited about welfare reform. They are excited about returning Medicaid to the States. I think, finally, we owe it to the American people just to keep our word and keep our promise. I know there is not a lot of precedent for it. They may not be used to it. But these things were promised the American people in 1994, and they are being delivered in 1995. We cannot do everything in 1 year. When you have had 40 years going the other direction of a bigger central government, more spending, more taxes, it may take more than one session of Congress to turn it all around. But this is the beginning. This is only the beginning, but it is a start of the process. We have been told that we can do it in 7 years. Those are the estimates of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, which, I might add, have been, I think, right 14 out of 16 times when you compare the projections of the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget in the White House. That would be under Presidents of both parties. That is not intended to be criticism. So, I thank all my colleagues, and I thank Senator Daschle, obviously, and others on the Democratic side, for coming together on an agreement. We can all say who won or who lost, but I think the bottom line is Federal employees are back at work. They are going to be paid. They are not going to suffer any loss of pay. If we do what we should do between now and December 15, it will not make any difference who won and who lost. I think we won. We did not blink. We have a 7-year balanced budget using CBO estimates. But that may not be important. The important thing is, if we do what we should do working together, the big winners will be the American people. The children will not understand it, and the grandchildren, but will understand it 5 or 10 or 15 years from now when they are looking for work, or want to get married, or want to buy a car, or want to go to college. If we have turned the country in the right direction--right now I think 70 percent of the American people say we are going in the wrong direction--if we downsize the Government, and if we reconnect the values of this Government of ours with the average American out there, and if we regain our place as the leader of the international community, then I believe that we are off to a good start. Everybody can take credit--Republicans, Democrats, the President, whoever. And it would be deserved. If we do the wrong thing, then I believe the American people will rebel. They will say, ``Well, business as usual. They talk a good game but it never happens.'' So I am excited today about the direction. I am excited about the agreement. I believe the House will pass the agreement we sent over last night, and I hope unanimously without much discussion. Then I would assume a week from today we will start the serious negotiations. We will be working with all of our colleagues on this side, and certainly I know Senator Daschle will work with his colleagues on the other side for input. We have also invited the Republican Governors to give us input which I think is very important. So I want to thank my colleagues for their cooperation and wish them a well deserved and happy Thanksgiving. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOLE. I am happy to yield.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I thank my friend from South Carolina. I yield the floor. Mr. LEAHY addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, during my years in the U.S. Senate, it has been my privilege to serve alongside two remarkable colleagues from Kansas. The first was Jim Pearson, who was a Senator of great common sense and great integrity who was widely respected by Members on both sides of the aisle. When Senator Pearson retired in 1978, Kansans replaced him with another person of common sense and integrity--Senator Nancy Landon Kassebaum. Kansans reelected Senator Kassebaum in 1984 and 1990 by overwhelming margins. And there is no doubt that she would have received another landslide next November. This morning in Topeka, however, Senator Kassebaum announced that she would retire from the Senate at the end of next year. Yes, this announcement was not unexpected, but still it comes as a blow to Kansans, and to all of us here in the Senate who have grown to count on Senator Kassebaum's leadership, wisdom, and friendship. I will have more to say about Senator Kassebaum in the coming weeks and months, but I did want to take just a minute today to pay tribute to our colleague and friend. The Senate has debated many historic and important issues in the past 17 years, and Senator Kassebaum has played a key role in many of them. As a member of the Labor and Human Resources Committee--a committee she now chairs--Senator Kassebaum has tirelessly worked for legislation to assist America's working men and woman. Kansans have a tradition for helping neighbors in need, and Senator Kassebaum continued that tradition here in the Senate, as she devoted time and energy to improving programs that help the less fortunate. Senator Kassebaum also emerged over the years as a strong force in shaping America's foreign policy. One example of her leadership in the arena was her instrumental role in shaping the policy that helped move South Africa to a new era of equality. Senator Kassebaum's father, the great Alf Landon, once said, ``there are some smart people in Washington. There are more of 'em in Kansas.'' Senator Kassebaum has succeeded because she has always kept those words in mind, and she has always understood that Kansans and Americans did not need the Federal Government to run their lives and make decisions for them. Mr. President, Nancy Kassebaum's record of intelligence, integrity, and independence has ensured that she will always be remembered as one of the true giants of Kansas political history. And I know I speak for all Members of the Senate in saying that we are very proud to call her our colleague and our friend.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, the Senate will begin consideration of the conference report accompanying the HUD-VA appropriations bill at 3 p.m. The Senate may also be asked to take further action with respect to the foreign operations appropriations bill. However, any votes ordered will be postponed to occur at 2:15 p.m., Tuesday, November 28, 1995.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, it is my understanding the House will not act on the adjournment resolution until about 5 o'clock. I do not know of any other Senators seeking recognition, so I now move we stand in recess subject to the call of the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today it stand in adjournment until the hour of 1 p.m., on Monday, November 27, that following the prayer, the Journal of proceedings be deemed approved to date, no resolutions come over under the rule, the call of the calendar be dispensed with, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and then there be a period for morning business until 3 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. DOLE. I also ask unanimous consent that the Senate begin consideration of the HUD-VA conference report at 3 p.m., on Monday, November 27.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, there are news reporters indicating that the administration is trying to wrap up peace talks in Dayton, OH, by tomorrow morning. No doubt about it, the administration has put a great deal of effort into this diplomatic process. A significant number of our diplomats have been working around the clock to get an agreement. Their hard work should be recognized. However, I hope that in their understandable haste, our negotiators will not lose sight of the objective--which is not just to secure a peace, but to secure a just and lasting peace. Most Members of Congress would agree that for an agreement to have a reasonable prospect of achieving a stable peace, it must include the following provisions: First, a clear demarcation of defensible borders for Bosnia and Herzegovina and resolution of all territorial issues among the parties; Second, clear lines of demarcation between the military forces of the parties to the agreement and procedures for separating the forces; Third, concurrence by all parties and witnesses to the agreement to multilateral lifting of the arms embargo on Bosnia and Herzegovina upon entry into force of the agreement; Fourth, acceptance by all parties and witnesses to the agreement to United States involvement in an effort to equip, arm, and train Bosnian Federation Forces; Fifth, establishment of clear standards for violations of the agreement and the unrestricted use of force by NATO to include air power as necessary to respond to violations of the agreement which threaten not only the peace, but the security of our forces; Sixth, an end to military intervention by the Governments of Croatia and Serbia and Montenegro in Bosnia and Herzegovina; Seventh, the dismantlement of the integrated air defense network linkages between Serbia and Bosnian-Serb held areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Eighth, full NATO implementation of the deny flight operation; and Ninth, measures to ensure that indicted war criminals are not in positions of authority, including any elected office. Mr. President, it seems to me that these are the minimum elements of a viable peace agreement. Without these elements, it is unlikely that a genuine peace will hold. Without these elements, it is unlikely that Bosnia will survive. We should not mistake securing any peace agreement in Dayton with securing a stable peace. No matter how difficult the negotiations are, if they fail to achieve an agreement that secures the integrity and independence of Bosnia they will have been a waste of time. Also essential to a stable peace is restoring public confidence and trust in the Government, institutions, and leaders of Bosnia. Absent justice, there will be no trust and no peace will endure. For the long- suffering Bosnian people, to believe in the peace, they [[Page S 17483]] must witness for themselves that justice will be done in Bosnia. Justice is the only comfort we can provide to mothers and fathers who have lost their children to war crimes. This will not be a just peace if war criminals remain at large and unaccountable for their heinous crimes. Furthermore, Mr. President, any peace will be short-lived if it does not provide the Bosnians with the authority and the means to defend their territory and their people. Absent a stable military balance, those who have clearly been the aggressors in this conflict will seek to press their advantage again. Whatever agreement is initialed in Dayton, it must provide for lifting the arms embargo and for addressing the existing military imbalance. If it does not, it will serve no greater purpose than to delay an inevitable return to hostilities. It will simply be another invitation to future aggression. Placing these important matters aside, foremost on the minds of the American people is whether or not young Americans should be ordered to enforce a peace agreement in Bosnia. Mr. President, in my view, the deployment of American forces into harms' way requires very careful deliberation on the part of the administration and the Congress. The President has informed me that he will come to Congress for support. That is the right thing to do. It would be unwise to send American forces without the support of the Congress and the American people. Right now, I do not believe that the President has it. He certainly will not have it, if a peace agreement does not include the provisions I have mentioned. But, he is also unlikely to receive our support if the implementation plan for our military forces does not, at the very least, include the following essential provisions: First, well-defined and clearly stated mission objectives achievable through military means; Second, robust rules of engagement allowing for disproportionate responses, as appropriate, to any attacks on United States and NATO forces and no restrictions or impediments on the ability of United States and NATO military forces to defend themselves; Third, United States military forces will operate only under a unified NATO command whose orders and authority cannot be constrained, conditioned, blocked or vetoed by any other party including the United Nations; Fourth, United States military forces shall use the authority granted in any annexes to the maximum extent consistent with their resources and shall act to deter, defeat or punish any violations from whatever source; Fifth, clear criteria for measuring progress toward achieving the objectives of the operation, a detailed exit strategy, and adequate resources for achieving these objectives and effecting a safe exit for all United States forces from Bosnia; Sixth, procedures for integrating appropriate UNPROFOR forces currently in Bosnia into a NATO-led implementation force and procedures for withdrawing any other UNPROFOR forces from Bosnia; and Seventh, specific provisions to prevent conflict between United States and non-NATO Forces and members of the civilian population of Bosnia. Mr. President, I believe that these criteria are very simple and very basic. I am not certain that Congress will go along with sending American Forces even if these provisions are included in a peace agreement and implementation plan. However, I am certain that without these elements, not only will Congress overwhelmingly disapprove of the peace agreement and the plan to send American Forces as peacekeepers, but that neither of these plans will have a chance of succeeding. The administration says that NATO will collapse if the United States does not send Americans into Bosnia as peacekeepers, but what happens to NATO if Americans are used to keep a peace which cannot be kept? What happens if we send Americans without adequate authority and provision to protect themselves? NATO should remain strong and united, however, unity in failure is the worst possible outcome. How much worse off would NATO be if United States and other NATO Forces were deployed in Bosnia only to leave in failure? Which brings me to my final question: Why this option? Why is sending 20,000 American troops to Bosnia the only option being considered by the Clinton administration? Why was no consideration given to using American air power and American supply lines for ground forces provided by our European allies? Mr. President, many questions remain. The President has not yet made the case for American involvement in Bosnia on this massive scale. The Congress has clearly stated its view that the President should seek authorization for any deployment to Bosnia. The Congress has also clearly stated its preference for lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia so that Bosnians may defend themselves. And we have done this time after time after time on a bipartisan basis. Many of us who supported lifting the embargo, did so not just because of our support for Bosnia's inherent right to self-defense, because we hoped we could avoid sending thousands of Americans into Bosnia to defend Bosnians. But, the President chose not to do that--and now we are where we are. Mr. President, we fully understand the constitutional authority of the President of the United States. We also understand the constitutional responsibility of the Congress. There is no greater responsibility for an elected representative than to prevent the needles shedding of American blood. We intend to exercise that responsibility with the utmost care. Mr. President, I want to particularly thank the Presiding Officer for his efforts not only in helping me prepare this statement, but for his consistent support for the position that I have outlined here and for his leadership on the Senate floor and in the Senate negotiations on both sides of the aisle. I appreciate very much his help.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I appreciate the Senator's interest in the defense appropriations bill. It has also been expressed by the chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Stevens, I think in a conversation earlier today with Senator Warner, a telephone conversation. I understand the President was going to sign legislative appropriations and Treasury, Postal appropriations about 5 o'clock today. I hope he has done that. That would mean, if we do not come together on a continuing resolution, which I think we will, that those people could be back at work. But I would underscore what the Senator from Virginia has stated. If the President is thinking about--and I know he is thinking about it-- any deployment in Bosnia, it seems to me he would be in a much stronger position--I leave that judgment to him because I have not made a judgment yet on that [[Page S 17484]] issue--if he signed the Defense appropriations bill and did it very quickly and sent the appropriate signal that he was not going to weaken our defense in any way.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, again let me thank the Senator from Arizona for his constant assistance and leadership on this issue. I think he is correct. I think we speak for Senator Lieberman and countless Senators on the other side of the aisle. If they were here at this point, they would be speaking out. So this is not a partisan issue. It never has been a partisan issue. It is about what steps should be taken before we decide to commit American forces anywhere under any condition. There are many concerned parents and grandparents around the country as well as young men and women themselves. I think we owe it to them and to their families and anybody in the future to make sure that certain criteria have been met. In my view, these are reasonable. I hope the President will find the criteria outlined in the statement to be reasonable. We will be furnishing a copy to Mr. Lake, the President's security adviser, within the next few moments. (Mr. McCAIN assumed the chair.)

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. DOLE

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me tell the staffs that we do not normally have Sunday sessions. In fact, I think the most recent Sunday session was a few years back. We do not have the exact date. I apologize. But I think we have, hopefully, very important business to resolve today. I hope, in accordance with the message from the Chaplain, that we can find a way to reach out to one another. That process is going on as we speak. I understand that the President's Chief of Staff, Leon Panetta, is now meeting with the Democratic leadership, Senator Daschle and others. He will soon be meeting with Budget chairman, Senator Domenici, on this side, and the House Budget chairman, Mr. Kasich, in my office, room S- 230. Following that meeting, hopefully, I will be able to visit with the Speaker. I just hope there can be some resolution of this matter today. I am now advised that the last Sunday session was October 27, 1990. It has been a little over 5 years ago. In my view, we made a good faith offer last night. I think it has been received as such by the President, or at least his representatives, and hopefully, if there is a small difference, we can resolve that. We are prepared to act. We are prepared to stay here throughout the day, into the evening, if necessary. I know there is a human side to this, too. There are a lot of families out there who are very concerned and probably under a great deal of stress. I can assure them that, whatever happens, when they come back to work, they will be paid for the days they missed, because they were missed through no fault of their own. That we can assure them. So I hope they have that assurance. So we will be working this afternoon and, hopefully, with everybody with the same mindset; that is, to see if we cannot come together. I want to thank the Senator from Virginia, Senator Warner, for his efforts throughout yesterday, and the other Senators on the floor, Senator Cochran, Senator Gorton, Senator Coverdell, Senator Snowe, and Senator Hatfield, of course, the chairman of the committee. He would like to have us pass a continuing resolution. He would also like us to finish the other appropriations bills, and while I am at it, bring up the Labor-HHS appropriations bill and pass that, hopefully this afternoon, on a voice vote, so we can go to conference and have that one last appropriation bill disposed of if that is possible. Maybe we can accomplish that today. We will have a period for morning business with Senators permitted to speak up to 10 minutes each. As I said last evening, if the rollcall vote is necessary, we will make certain that if we should reach some agreement, if a rollcall vote is necessary, we will notify all Members so nobody is disadvantaged. Hopefully, if we can reach agreement on both sides of the aisle, there would be no need for a record vote if we can do it by a voice vote. Some of our colleagues, on both sides of the aisle, are on business matters far from here. So we will try to accommodate their concerns. If we are going to act before the next work week, we need to do it today so some of the workers will know they will be coming to work tomorrow or the next day. So I thank my colleagues for their patience, and I thank everybody for their indulgence in this Sunday session. But, in my view, it is important and we should be here. We should be trying to resolve this controversy. On the other side, obviously, it is very important. Everybody understands that the primary concern, at least on our side of the aisle, is that we have a 7-year balanced budget, a balanced budget by the year 2002. I guess I would say the major [[Page S 17470]] problem is who is going to do the scoring. This is sort of inside baseball, but the question is whether it will be the Congressional Budget Office, or the President's scoring apparatus known as the Office of Management and Budget. So that is where we are. If we have any additional information, I will certainly pass it on to my colleagues as soon as it is received. After Members have spoken in morning business, then it would be my desire to have a recess subject to the call of the Chair, and we will see what develops in the next 30 or 40 minutes.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me first state, since I have told my colleagues I would inform them when we had any information, the negotiation is still ongoing as far as the continuing resolution is concerned. I think we made a lot of progress this afternoon. That is how I would characterize the exchange. We have exchanged options. We have now given an option to Senator Daschle, who I understand will be discussing it with Mr. Panetta, the President's Chief of Staff, and Mr. Gephardt, the Democratic leader in the House. Hopefully, we can, as I said earlier, resolve this this evening. If so, I think the process would be we would pass a 1-day continuing resolution, send it to the House, which they could act on tonight. Then we would hopefully pass the other agreed resolution in the Senate tonight, and they would take that up in the House tomorrow. Those are tentative indications of what would happen. But I wanted to speak about another very important matter.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I send an amendment to the desk modifying the text of the joint resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, that was the compromise language that would extend until December 15 the date agreed upon. In fact, I ask that a copy [[Page S 17489]] of the resolution--I might just read it quickly. This is the agreement reached. I want to thank my colleague, Senator Daschle, and thank Senator Exon. Also, of course, I want to thank my colleague, Senator Domenici, and the others who have been working on this throughout the day and throughout yesterday. There have been Members on each side. I know Senator Warner has been involved, as have others. But what we have agreed to now, in a bipartisan, nonpartisan way, I think, is a very satisfactory conclusion to what has been a rather tense situation the past several days. (a) The President and the Congress shall enact legislation in the first session of the 104th Congress to achieve a balanced budget not later than fiscal year 2002 as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office, and the President and the Congress agree that the balanced budget must protect future generations, ensure Medicare solvency, reform welfare, and provide adequate funding for Medicaid, education, agriculture, national defense, veterans, and the environment. Further, the balanced budget shall adopt tax policies to help working families and to stimulate future economic growth. (b) The balanced budget agreement shall be estimated by the Congressional Budget Office based on its most recent current economic and technical assumptions, following a thorough consultation and review with the Office of Management and Budget, and other Government and private experts. We also take care of back pay in this resolution. And the continuing resolution will be at 75 percent. I will ask the chairman of the Appropriation Committee to explain this in more detail. And it will extend until December 15. I would be happy to yield to the distinguished Democratic leader.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, before I yield to the Senator from Oregon, Senator Hatfield, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, let me also thank Senator Lott who has been on the telephone the last hour or two checking with Members who had problems. Also, Senator Gorton who helped us with some editorial comment and corrected a few things which were not quite accurate. Senator Mack and Senator Cochran were there yesterday afternoon and again today helping us bring this together. And, of course, Senator Warner has been on the floor and in the meetings. We appreciate that very much. Coming from Virginia he has a number of concerns about Federal employees. As I said earlier, the Senator from New Mexico deserves great credit. I think it is fair to say it indicates again if we can reach out we can come together. I think we preserved a very important principle: a balanced budget in 7 years. That was very important to Members on this side and I think to a number of Members on the other side. Also, obviously the Presiding Officer has been in the thick of this from the start. We appreciate the President pro tempore's discussions, and a number of other colleagues, Senator McCain, who is not on the floor, and Senator Pressler, who was there for a few hours this afternoon. We had a lot of people come and go and a lot of input. I yield now to the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I indicated earlier the President was about to sign legislative and Treasury. I am now informed he has signed the legislative appropriations bill and the Treasury, post office appropriations bill. So that brings it to a total of six that have been signed, two or three that are still in conference, and one still has not passed the Senate because of objections on the other side, the Labor-HHS bill.