Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, this week marks the 30th anniversary of Medicare--the Health Care Program that currently serves 4 million disabled Americans and about 33 million elderly Americans. Anniversaries are normally a time for celebration. But, this 30th anniversary is a time of great concern. As we all know, the Medicare trustees, three of whom are members of the President's Cabinet, have warned us that, at best, Medicare has only seven more anniversaries left before going bankrupt. Mr. President, I believe one of the most important responsibilities of this Congress is to preserve, improve, and protect Medicare so that it does not go bankrupt and will continue to be there for Americans for the next 30 years, and the 30 years beyond that. Before I look to the future, however, I want to take just a minute to look to the past. When Medicare was debated in Congress in 1965, I voted against it. And there are those at the Democrat National Committee who seem to believe that vote is either proof that I am out to gut Medicare, or that it disqualifies me from participating in this debate. I only wish they would devote as much energy to the search for solutions to Medicare's current fiscal crisis, as they do to questioning the motives of others. My vote against Medicare was not a decision I made lightly. I knew my vote would lead to a round of criticism. But in the end, I voted against the legislation for several reasons. The first reason was because I had concerns that we would be establishing an entitlement for many Americans who truly were not in need of Government assistance. We all know that by their very nature, entitlements are designed to grow. And, as we have seen over the past 30 years, the Medicare entitlement has done precisely that. In 1965, when Medicare was enacted, the House Ways and Means Committee predicted that the part A portion would cost $9 billion in 1990. Needless to say, they were wrong. By 1974, we were spending $9 billion--just 8 years after Medicare's passage. This year, Medicare part A will cost $158 billion--58 times the amount it cost in its first year. Second, I was concerned that this growing entitlement would be financed either through higher taxes or deficit spending, and that both of these options would compromise the futures of generations to come. Again, by 1974, the tax rate to finance the program was already twice the initial projection. And the third factor behind my vote was that I shared many of the concerns articulated by the then President of the American Medical Association, Dr. Leonard Larson, who said: The administration's medical care proposal, if enacted, would certainly represent the first major, irreversible step toward the complete socialization of medical care. The bill does not provide insurance or prepayment of any type, but compels one segment of our population to underwrite a socialized program of health care for another, regardless of need. Mr. President, the AMA at that time put forward an alternative proposal, called Eldercare, which I supported. I must say as I look back on that day in 1965 and on the weeks before the debate, and I have gone back to check the Congressional Record and some of the statements made by my colleagues, Elder Care had many more benefits than Medicare. We covered prescription drugs in Elder Care, which are still not covered today under Medicare. In addition, that plan would have cost less because it took into account the beneficiaries' ability to pay. Would Medicare be in better shape today had my concerns been addressed at its creation? I believe it would. And I also believe that if nothing is done and Medicare goes bankrupt, the American public will not look back at 1965 to decide where to fix blame--they will look back to 1995. So, where do we go from here? Mr. President, we cannot turn back the clock. But, we can learn from the past. And, that means doing what is necessary to improve Medicare so that it can move successfully into the 21st century. Despite the rhetoric coming out of the White House and the Democratic [[Page S 10865]] committee, Republicans, including myself, do not support cutting Medicare. We recognize the need for Medicare's growth, and our historic budget resolution allows for an annual growth rate of 6.4 percent. Under this agreement, Medicare spending will top $1.6 trillion over the next 7 years. In addition, the trust fund's solvency will be ensured through the year 2005. Mr. President, Republicans are also interested in creating more choices for Medicare beneficiaries. Fee-for-service health care may be great for some, and they should be able to keep that if they choose. But, there are other options out there now that may offer more benefits but are unavailable to Medicare beneficiaries. I would like to see these choices extended to all Americans. Mr. President, the committees of jurisdiction in the House and Senate are currently working reconciliation legislation, that will include proposals to preserve, improve, and protect Medicare. As required by the budget resolution passed by Congress, this plan must be reported out of committee by September 22. Some on the other side of the aisle, however, have requested the details of this legislation be made available before the August recess. While we like to accommodate our colleagues as much as we can around here, the fact of the matter is that this is an extraordinarily important piece of legislation that cannot be slapped together a month ahead of schedule. The chairmen of the committees of jurisdiction have assured me that their staffs will work throughout August to give this bill the careful attention it deserves. Mr. President, we have solicited ideas from the White House since April, when we first received the Trustee's report. Unfortunately, we have had no response, which was made our job that much more challenging. But, as I said before, that does not alter our determination--I think it also includes many of my colleagues on the other side, I would hope--to preserve, improve, and protect the Medicare Program so that it will continue to be there for those who rely on it today and for those who will do so for many years in the future.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 2 p.m. on Monday, July 31, the Senate resume consideration of S. 908, the State Department revitalization bill.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I withdraw the amendment.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be permitted to meet on Friday, July 28, 1995, beginning at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-215, to conduct a hearing on the debt limit.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Labor and Human Resources be authorized to meet for a hearing on health insurance and domestic violence, during the session of the Senate on Friday, July 28, 1995, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Friday, July 28, 1995, to conduct a nomination hearing. (Nominees will include: Herbert F. Collins, of Massachusetts, to be a Member of the Thrift Depositor Protection Oversight Board; and Maria Luisa Mabilangan Haley, of Arkansas, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the Export-Import Bank.)

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Friday, July 28, 1995, to conduct a hearing on the condition of the savings association insurance fund.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the American Family-Owned Business Act--a bill that will preserve the American family and save jobs across the country. I am proud that this bill was developed on a bipartisan basis, led on the Democratic side by my colleague from Arkansas, Senator Pryor. We are joined by Senators Roth, Baucus, Pressler, Breaux, Simpson, Bond, D'Amato, Grassley, Nickles, Helms, Warner, Gregg, Bennett, Lugar, Snowe, Abraham, Burns, Lott, Ashcroft, Coats, Inhofe, Hutchison, Stevens, Murkowski, Kassebaum, Kerrey, Cohen, and Hatch. The current Federal estate tax is just too burdensome on the American family. Time and time again, farmers and other business owners across the country have told me that estate tax rates are just too high. They rise quickly from 18 to 55 percent, effectively making the Government a 50-50 partner in a family business. Even the most sophisticated estate tax planning and the purchase of life insurance cannot sufficiently mitigate the effects of these high rates, leaving families no recourse but to sell their businesses to pay the estate tax. This bill will stop these forced sales from happening again. I agree with many who say that estate tax rates should be reduced across the board, or repealed entirely. And I hope that we do that some day. But today we take an important first step with the American Family-Owned Business Act. This bill cuts estate tax rates in half and also creates a new exclusion that completely eliminates the estate tax for small businesses. Under the new exclusion, family-owned businesses can exempt up to $1.5 million of family business assets from their estate. If a family business is valued at more than $1.5 million, the excess is taxed at one-half of the current rates--thus providing a maximum tax rate of 27.5 percent. My colleagues and I introduce this bill to protect and preserve family enterprises. We know too well the adverse impact of an estate tax-forced sale. The family loses its livelihood, the family business employees lose their jobs, and the community suffers. We must do all that we can to help family-owned businesses not only survive, but also prosper. They are the job creators in this country. In the 1980's alone, family businesses accounted for an increase of more than 20 million private-sector jobs. By relieving families from the burden of the estate tax and letting them keep their business, they can continue to prosper. And when families continue to operate their businesses, we all benefit--the business employees keep their jobs, the Government receives income taxes on business profits, and the families retain their livelihood. The estate tax is not a Democratic or a Republican problem, or one that affects only rural or urban families. There are farmers, ranchers, or other family businesses in each State that would benefit from this legislation. That is why this bill is supported by dozens of groups, each listed at the conclusion of this statement. Many of my colleagues have introduced bills to provide estate tax relief in various situations. These bills include important ideas, many of which are reflected in the American Family-owned Business Act. As we begin the process of providing estate tax relief, we hope to work closely with the sponsors of these other bills, and to work toward common goals. We encourage those Senators who have sponsored their own bills to sign on to this one and work toward a single package of estate tax relief. As we intend, the American Family-Owned Business Act provides relief for family businesses across the country--from the tree farmer in the Northeast or the rancher in the Southwest, to the farmer in the Midwest or the corner grocery store owner in the South. The bill requires heirs to participate in the family business. These participation rules are deliberately flexible and recognize that different family businesses need differing levels of participation by heirs. For example, the bill recognizes that owners of tree farms may participate at a level lower than that of owners of other businesses, since tree farming often does not require continuous attention as do other farming activities. This bill provides the critical relief needed for American families' businesses. We urge all our colleagues to support this effort. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and other material be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that in the future the Presiding Officer not be bound by the precedence established on March 16, 1985, regarding legislation on an appropriations bill.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I rise today to extend my heartfelt thank you to Mariam Bechtel who is retiring after 17 years of loyal service to the Congress. Mariam has served my Senate office since February 1984. Additionally, she served in the office of Congressman Page Belcher from Oklahoma for 6 years before joining my staff. Everyone who has come in contract with Mariam Bechtel, and I know that she has many friends throughout the Congress, knows of her warm and cheerful manner. When Members needed a room to host a reception or meeting, they knew that Mariam was the one to call. When Kansans needed to touch base in Washington, they knew to call Mariam. Mariam has always gone that extra mile--to help a fellow Senator, their constituents, and of course, Kansans. I ask my colleagues to join me in wishing Mariam and her husband Charlie all the best in their retirement. And thank you Mariam for your dedicated service to me and to the Senate.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, the American people sent us a message last November. A lot of us might prefer to think that message was directed to the executive branch alone. But part of that message was directed to Congress. The American people want a Congress accountable to them, and them alone. The American people want us to rein in our appetites and to take the steps necessary to correct the perception that Congress suffers from an arrogance that shields it from the dramatic changes sweeping this country. I am pleased that we have responded, and I am pleased that we have done so in a bipartisan manner. The very first legislation passed in this Congress was a requirement that Congress would henceforth live under the same laws that apply to everyone else. We have begun the hard task of living under a balanced budget just like most Americans do every day. Several days ago, we passed the next installment on reform legislation, legislation which reformed the way lobbyists do business in our Nation's Capital. And, today, we have passed the next congressional reform package, one which directly confronts the concerns many Americans might have about how we conduct our business. Now, I think in most cases the problem of gifts to Members is one of perception. But I think respect for the institution of the Senate demands that we take the extra steps necessary to ensure that perceptions do not become reality. We have done that today. I have in the past made clear that if it was necessary I would be prepared to eliminate all gifts--I do not go out to dinner with lobbyists. But I do not think anyone around here has cornered the market on integrity and the bipartisan package before us is a good balance of the need for reform and the need for common sense. We certainly do not intend to place Members in the awkward position of refusing a gift of nominal value when addressing, say, the local Kiwanis Club, and situations like these are addressed in a reasonable way by this bipartisan package. If these reforms turn out to be insufficient, then we will tighten them up further. I want to pay tribute to those on both sides of the aisle who worked so hard to resolve very real differences--Senators McCain and Levin, in particular, who worked so hard to resolve these differences. I would like to thank Senator Lott for heading up a bipartisan task force that produced this gift reform package. He and his assistant, Alison Carroll, did a superb job. And, finally, I would like to thank Senator McConnell, who was ably assisted by Melissa Patack, [[Page S 10859]] for his leadership on yet another tough issue.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I congratulate all of my colleagues involved in these negotiations. I think we have a good bill, one that we can be proud of, that has been brought about by bipartisan consensus and negotiation. I think this is one issue we want to get behind us. We have done that with what I think will be a unanimous vote. We promised to complete this action by today, and we have done that. We have also taken care of lobbying reform. I thank the Senator from Michigan, the Senator from Arizona, the Senator from Wisconsin, the Senator from Kentucky, Senator Breaux, Senator Wellstone, Senator Johnston, Senator Feingold, and many others who have been involved directly. It is always more difficult when it affects us. In my view, we have a good result and one that ought to be supported by everyone.

Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was agreed to.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the previous cloture motion to proceed to S. 908 be vitiated.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I rise today to say farewell and thank you to Prasad Sharma who has served my office as a legislative correspondent and staff assistant for the past year. Prasad was recently accepted by the Emory University School of Law, a high honor which he richly deserves. A Kansan himself, Prasad has been a real asset. He has kept the people of Kansas informed about important events in Washington, served a vital role on my defense and national security team, and Prasad has always been someone to rely on when things needed to get done. I ask my colleagues to join me in wishing Prasad Sharma all the best at Emory and in his future endeavors. He is someone I know we will hear a lot more from in the years to come, because he is an outstanding young man.

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 might say to all Senators that the Senate will resume consideration of the State Department revitalization bill at 2 p.m. on Monday. Any rollcall votes will not occur prior to 6 p.m on Monday. I might also say that somebody who wants to debate only the State Department bill can do so this afternoon if they cannot be here Monday. It might be a good opportunity for opening statements which they want to make, or some statement about some amendment and a discussion about one of their amendments. I have also visited with both the minority Democratic whip and the Democratic leader. And I think we should put all Senators on notice that there probably will be a Saturday session a week from tomorrow. We have a lot to do. We would like get out of here as quickly as we can in August. We are not going to make the August 4 recess, but beginning maybe sometime later in August. That is what we will know for certain on Monday. But I want to put Senators on notice that there could be a Saturday session on August 5. So all Senators should be on notice. It is my hope that we will be on with the welfare reform maybe late Friday night and, if we should get bogged down on the State Department revitalization bill and unable to get cloture on the bill itself, if it seems likely we will not get cloture on the second, then I think we would move to the DOD authorization bill where I understand that could be finished in perhaps 2\1/2\ days. Upon completion of that, it would be my intention to try to work out--in fact, before we complete--if we can work out some dual-track procedure, which we have done in the past, where we consider appropriations bills after a certain time each day because the appropriators are very anxious that we complete at least six appropriations bills before we start the recess. We have completed two. I understand one conference has been completed on the legislative appropriations. We will take up the conference report next week. Energy and water is available now. But there are some problems we are trying to work out. There may be as many as three others before Tuesday or Wednesday of next week. So I just say to my colleagues that on Monday there will be no votes until 6 p.m., but I assume there will be votes at 6 p.m., and then we are in for probably long nights and maybe a Saturday session next week. And we will be in all of the following week. Mr. FORD addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now turn to S. 908, the State Department revitalization bill.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Leader time was reserved, right?

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that morning business be extended until 2:15 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for not more than 5 minutes each, unless they get consent, of course.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, we are still waiting. We have people negotiating on the so-called gift ban. We hope to have some report by then. We would like to complete action on that today. I hope we can complete action on that today. Mr. KYL addressed the Chair.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I will not oppose the resolution. I would like to say just a word because I think in addition to casting the most votes, 14,000, he remembers each vote. With his extraordinary memory, there is no doubt in my mind he can go back and tell you what the 30th vote was and the 3,000th vote and probably the day it happened and what we were doing at the time. As has also been pointed out, during his 36 years in the Senate he has held more titles and more leadership positions than any other Senator in history. And also he has his role, as Senator Daschle alluded, of historian. And no one knows more. In fact, I tell stories as I go around that with what Senator Byrd knows about this place and all he knows about Roman history, I have tried to get C-SPAN to get me college credits if I carefully listened to him on Roman history. But that is the truth, and he has written the volumes of books, and he understands it. His third role is as champion of the interests of the people of West Virginia. When there were rumors last year that our former colleague, George Mitchell, might become commissioner of baseball, I speculated that if Senator Byrd would become commissioner, all the teams would have been moved to West Virginia. Now, that may or may not have happened, but behind that joke is the fact that Senator Byrd works 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year helping the people of West Virginia. Finally, amidst all of his duties and responsibilities, Senator Byrd also fills the role of friend. And I have noticed my colleagues on both sides will go up and sit next to Senator Byrd during a vote or after a vote and talk to Senator Byrd about parliamentary procedure. Although we come from different parties and we have had different views on some issues from time to time, Senator Byrd has always remained my friend and I think of every Senator on each side of the aisle. I know we all feel the same way. The final chapter on Senator Byrd will not be written for a long, long time. I have no doubt that as a leader, historian, a champion of his State and a friend, Senator Byrd has set standards that will always be remembered.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Finance Committee be permitted to meet on Thursday, July 27, 1995 beginning at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-215, to conduct a hearing on the Medicaid Distribution formula.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. We will not recess but we will protect Senators. I know there are about 11 Senators who wish to attend that ceremony, and we will not have votes during that time. Mr. BUMPERS addressed the Chair.