Robert Dole

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, there will be a period for morning business this morning from 9 o'clock until 10 o'clock. I ask unanimous consent that from 9:45 a.m. until 10 o'clock, I might have that 15 minutes.

Mr. DOLE. From 10 o'clock to 12 noon, the time will be under the control, I think, of Senator Nickles. At 12 o'clock or thereabouts, I will make a brief statement. Then there will be recess until 2:15 for the weekly policy luncheons. At 2:15, the Senate will swear in Sheila Frahm, as a U.S. Senator, as my successor. Following the swearing in, it is my understanding we will begin debate on the budget resolution, the conference report, 10 hours, and votes, therefore, are possible on the budget resolution conference report or any other items that may be cleared for action. We are still trying to break the logjam on nominations. I am not certain we can get that done before noon today. I know we have cleared some nominations. We will take those up, hopefully, between 9:15 and 10 o'clock. I repeat what I have said many times: I do not like holding nominations and have not made it a practice personally. Hopefully, those who have the problems can work them out either today or after I am gone, because there are many families here trying to make plans. Holding up their nominations makes it difficult. Of course, personally, I am still hopeful we can clear the World Trade Organization legislation. At one time it was cleared in the U.S. Senate. All it does is to give Congress a role in the event there are arbitrary decisions made by faceless, nameless bureaucrats in Geneva where we can exit from the World Trade Organization. It seems to me it is something we would want to do. It is supported by the President, supported by Mickey Kantor, the former U.S. Trade Representative. In fact, it was part of an agreement when I agreed to support it, standing with the President on the White House lawn--the GATT agreement which was part of that agreement. I hope the administration would be helpful. As I understand, all the holds are on the other side of the aisle. I would like to complete action on that before noon today. If it is not possible, it is not possible. Senator Daschle had indicated on Thursday he would be pleased to help. I am certain he will over the next few hours. If anybody has any problems with that legislation, I think if they understood it--and it is not very complicated--it simply says that Congress should have a role, too. There is a great deal of concern by people all over America who may have lost their jobs to foreign competition--at least they believe they have lost their jobs to foreign competition-- they are concerned about all these, whether it is GATT or NAFTA, all these trade agreements where we are exporting jobs. This gives Congress the responsibility and a role in determining whether or not we should withdraw from the World Trade Organization. In my view, it is legislation that should have been passed sometime ago. I understand it is acceptable to the House if we can free it from the Senate. Senator Byrd has had an interest in it. He has improved it some. He has an amendment, I think, that strengthens it more. It is not a partisan issue. I hope we can clear it this morning. If not, I know sometimes things do not work in this place. I also thank Chaplain Ogilvie for his thoughts and his prayers. Between now and 9:45, I assume the time will be equally divided.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me indicate in advance, I want to get consent in a second to proceed to some nominations. There are 34. We are still trying to clear others. I still hope we can clear some of the judges. I ask my friends on both sides of the aisle to see if they cannot come together here in the next hour or two and free up many of the judicial nominations. But we are making progress. I think this is some indication of that. I thank my colleagues and Senator Daschle and his colleagues.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that, in executive session, the Senate proceed en bloc to the following nominations on today's Executive Calendar: Nos. 490, 491, 492, 495, 496, 497, 540, 541, 542, 549, 550, 551, 552, 553, 556, 557, 558, 559, 562, 564, 565, 566, 567, 568, 569, 570, 571, 572, 578, 601, 602, 603, 604, 605, and all nominations placed on the Secretary's desk in the Coast Guard.

Mr. DOLE. I further ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; that the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table; that any statements relating to the nominations be placed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action; and further, that the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, soon the Senate will act on the conference report on the fiscal year 1997 budget resolution. I had hoped that the Senate could have passed this conference report by today, but final action will occur soon. When the Senate passes the fiscal year 1997 budget resolution, it will be doing important work because no policy is more important to the economic future of all Americans, and particularly to the future of our children, than a balanced budget. We will also be fulfilling our promise to the American people to balance the budget by the year 2002. I am proud of our achievement in keeping our promise to the American people and I am proud of this budget. The fiscal year 1997 budget resolution balances the Federal budget in 6 years. It reduces overall Federal spending by more than $700 billion over the next 6 years. It provides family tax relief of $122 billion for a $500-per-child tax credit to help America's working families. It provides for real welfare reform. And it would prevent the Medicare program from pending bankruptcy. The Medicare trustees reported last week that Medicare is going broke more quickly and in this budget we save Medicare from bankruptcy in the year 2001. That's why this is a good conference agreement. It represents some compromises between the House and the Senate. No one got everything they wanted. But it's the right budget for now and for putting us on strong course for the next century. Mr. President, it is no small accomplishment that all of us now agree that the budget should be balanced by the year 2002. That's a big change from this time last year when we were debating the budget. Now it's not just Republicans saying it, but all of us, from Republicans to blue dog Democrats to the President. That in itself is good news for America. But we're not there yet. Last year we passed the first balanced budget in a generation. But President Clinton vetoed it. I hope all Senators will support this budget resolution to finally get the job done. This budget will help define for the American people which of us are for more Washington spending and which of us are for less Washington spending; which of us are for more taxes and which of us are for less taxes. And most importantly, which of us are willing to do what's necessary to stop the stranglehold that the deficit places on our economic future. Some say deficits don't matter. But the fact is that the Federal budget deficit is like a tax hike on working families. The deficit drives up interest rates--and not by a little but by a lot. It is a stealth tax that every family with a home, every father and mother with a child in college, every young person who buys a car must pay, and pay, and pay. What does this stealth tax cost in dollars? Over $36,000 on a typical home mortgage. More than $1,400 on an ordinary student loan. Nearly $700 on a typical car loan. Remember that in 1994, the Federal Government spent $203 billion in interest on the Federal debt--more than it spent on education, job training, public works, and child nutrition combined. In 1994, Americans paid an average of $800 per person in taxes just to service interest on the debt--again, not to pay off the debt or even to reduce the debt, just to pay the interest on the debt. We simply cannot continue to mortgage America's future. If we continue current tax and spending policies, future generations will be saddled with effective tax rates of more than 80 percent. Mr. President, let's do what's right. Let's pass the fiscal year 1997 budget resolution. Let's do everything we can this year to preserve the American dream of economic security for future generations of Americans. Our children and our grandchildren deserve no less from us. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I will not make a unanimous-consent request, but I will just say, again, a word about the WTO modification, the World Trade Organization. As I indicated earlier this morning, it seems to me it is not a partisan measure. It just gives Congress some input, some authority and some responsibility. We know the American people are concerned about job loss, about exporting jobs and about all these international faceless, nameless bureaucrats who make decisions that might impact on their job. So it occurred to me the Congress should have some say, and we should be able to initiate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization. I think if we go back and look at the past, we will find that most Presidents are reluctant to do that, regardless of party. So this would give Congress, Democrats and Republicans--probably working together--a right to initiate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization. To me, those who voted against NAFTA or GATT--this pertains only to GATT, the World Trade Organization--but this would be sending a very strong signal. It would also, I think, be helpful; it might send a strong enough signal that some of our unfair competitors in foreign countries understand that we are serious about this. We are concerned about American jobs, whether they be in Georgia or Kansas, wherever, and that we in Congress are accountable. We are on the ballot every 6 years or every 2 years. So I hope sometime before--let us just pick a number, say 2 o'clock-- we can clear this and pass it. If not, I will leave it up to my friend from Georgia to take care of it after I am gone. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, on April 14, 1969, I gave my first speech on the Senate floor. I spoke about people with disabilities--the challenges they face in their daily lives and how appropriate services can make a big difference by giving them a shot at opportunities others take for granted. Thus, as I leave the Senate today, it is with a sense of symmetry and continuing mission that I am pleased today to rise in support of the Individual with Disabilities Education Act. I might say, we hoped to have that cleared. There is some problem. IDEA, as it is often called, gives States important financial help to educate students with disabilities and, in turn, provides students with disabilities with the guarantee of a free and appropriate public education. Mr. President, there are some issues that transcend politics, foster a bipartisan spirit, and result in legislation that makes a real and lasting difference. In my view, disability has always been one of those issues. Perhaps no legislation has been more important in improving opportunity for young people with disabilities than IDEA. In 1975, I was honored to help craft the first IDEA legislation. At that time, as unbelievable some may find it today, millions of young people were not allowed into school, simply because they had a disability. IDEA has helped change that, and IDEA is as important today as it was 21 years ago. But the world has changed, and so, too, must IDEA. This latest reauthorization bill cuts administrative redtape, provides States more flexibility in spending Federal funds, demands greater accountability for educational results and helps educators maintain safe schools--without sacrificing any of the important protections IDEA gives students with disabilities. I want to acknowledge the hard work of Senators Frist and Harkin. Their efforts have paid off in a good bill, and I congratulate them. Mr. President, I do not know what judgments historians of the future will make of my record in the Senate. But, for me, I can think of no more important issue in a personal sense than disability, one that I have pursued with more constancy or greater pride, or has made a greater difference in people's lives. I hope others will reflect that what I did was right, not merely convenient. (The remarks of Mr. Dole pertaining to the introduction of S. 1856 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, later today I will introduce a bipartisan commission bill on campaign finance reform, something I talked about in 1990--not last week or last year, and it is in the Record. In fact, Senator Mitchell and I even experimented with our own limits commission. The problem was there was not any enforcement there, so Congress did not do anything. I am no rocket scientist, and I have been here long enough to know that if Republicans were in charge, we will try to have a bill better for us, and if the Democrats are in charge, they will want a bill that is better for them. I will introduce a bill later, along with a statement calling for a bipartisan commission which would have some teeth in it so, if they made recommendations, Congress would act up or down. I hope it is something we could get our arms around. It will not happen soon, but I think we need to focus on it. We are into another election cycle. I know there is a lot of criticism by a lot of people about fundraising. None of us likes to do it. I do not. I believe we can address this in a responsible, objective way by finding people outside of politics who understand the problem and can deal with it and treat all of us fairly, whether we are, again, Republicans or Democrats. I yield the floor.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I want to go back 136 years ago this summer. A committee arrived in Springfield, IL--Senator Simon probably knows the story--and it formally notified Abraham Lincoln that the Republican Party had nominated him to run for President. History records that Lincoln's formal reply to the news was just two sentences long. And then as he surveyed the crowd of friends gathered outside his home, as I survey the crowd of friends here in the galleries and on the floor, he said, ``Now I will no longer defer the pleasure of taking each of you by the hand.'' So I guess, as Lincoln said then, 136 years ago, if all of us who are leaving this year--and I am only one, and I know we have the same thoughts and the same emotions--if we can all go out and shake hands with all the people who were responsible for us being here, it would take a long time. You begin with your family. You, obviously, begin with your parents, your brothers, your sisters, and you think about all the support they have provided and all the good things that happened. And you think about the Senate. You think about your family, your remarkable, wonderful wife and daughter, who have seen victories and seen defeats and have put up with, as all our spouses and children do around here, with late hours, not being home on weekends, and all the demands that go with serving in the Senate. So I am very honored to have my wife Elizabeth and my daughter Robin in the gallery today. [Applause.] I know they join me in expressing our deep appreciation to everyone here and the people of Kansas. As all of us go back who are leaving this year, thinking about leaving in a couple of years, or whatever, you think about the people who sent you here and the people who tried not to send you here--once you are here, you forget about those. [Laughter.] And they are all your constituents, whether Democrats, Republicans, or Independents. And four times, my friends in Kansas, Republicans and Democrats and Independents, I believe, gave me their votes for the House of Representatives and five times they have given me their votes to the U.S. Senate. I think to all of us, such trust is perhaps the greatest gift that can come to any citizen in our democracy, and I know I will be forever grateful, as everyone here will be forever grateful, to our friends and our supporters who never gave up on us, who never lost their confidence in us. Maybe they did not like some of our votes, or maybe they did not like other things, but when the chips were down, they were there. We all think of all the phone calls and all the letters and all the visits of people who come to your office with big problems and small. Or you think about the town meetings you have attended. I have attended, as have some others here, town meetings all over America. They are pretty much the same. They are good people, they have real questions, and they like real answers. I always thought that differences were a healthy thing and that is why we are all so healthy, because we have a lot of differences in this Chamber. I have never seen a healthier group in my life. [Laughter.] And then there are those on our staff. Sometimes we forget to say thank you. I have had one member of my staff for 30 years, and others for 19, and so on. They have been great, and they have been loyal, and they have been enthusiastic. Their idealism and intelligence and loyalty have certainly meant a lot to me, and I think a lot to other people in this body, and other staff members, and the people they work with on a daily basis. Many are on the Senate floor or in the gallery today. I just say, thank you very much. We have had a little fun along the way, too. It gets kind of dull around here from time to time, so you have to have a little fun. When you really want to have fun to get away, you can go out to the beach--which is now my ``beach,'' and I will try to pack it up this afternoon. All of those who served in the Senate--and I see some of my former colleagues here today--and all those who serve the Senate, whether the Parliamentarian or the page, I thank you for all of us for your tireless service. I do not want my friends in the press gallery to fall out of their seats in shock. But let me add in acknowledgment of those who have worked here in this building I also salute you. I think it is fair to say that we do not always agree with everything you said or wrote, but I know that what you do off this floor is as vital to American democracy as anything we do on it. And we have to keep that in mind. So I say that it has been a great ride. There have been a few bumps along the way. I have learned a lot from people in this room. I have even gone to Senator Byrd when I was the majority leader to ask his advice on how to defeat him on an issue. If you know Robert Byrd as I do, he gave me the answer. But it was not easy. I mean, this man is determined. I know that in his first book, his great works about the Senate, he writes about when I became the majority leader. He very candidly writes in his book that he had his doubts about this Bob Dole because I might be too partisan, or I might not work with the minority leader. But I have heard him say a number of times since that I demonstrated that I was not that partisan. And if I understood one thing, as my successor will understand, it is that unless the two leaders are working together, nothing is going to happen in this place. We have to trust each other, as Senator Daschle and I have, as Senator Mitchell and I have, as Senator Byrd and I have. And I also have great respect for Senator Mansfield and Senator Baker, though I did not have the privilege of being in the leadership at that time. I say to all those who have been in the leadership positions, it is a difficult life. After 2 o'clock today when somebody calls me about bringing up their amendment, I will say that it is all right with me; bring it up any time you want, and I will not stand in your way. [Laughter and Applause.] I am looking at one of the giants in the Senate right now, Senator Thurmond. And I looked at others on the way in, like Senator Byrd. I thought about Senators Baker, Dirksen, Russell, and many, many more, Democrats and Republicans, who love this place, who have made it work. I repeat frequently the statement of Senator Dirksen--and I do not know whether he made it on the floor--who said, ``A billion here, a billion there, and soon it will add up to real money.'' If only he could come back today, it would be ``a trillion here and a trillion there.'' Then there was Hubert Humphrey. Nobody ever understood how Bob Dole and Hubert Humphrey could be such good friends. We did not have a problem at all. And he used to say of his own speeches, ``I never thought they were too long. I enjoyed every minute.'' [Laughter.] I remember we were in the hallway one day talking about the talk shows. And, of course, I was only watching them in those days, but he was on one every Sunday. It used to be issues and answers for the normal guest. But for Hubert it was issue and answer--then the time was up. And then there was Senator Mansfield in just the reverse. When he was on a Sunday talk show, it was ``yep,'' ``nope,'' ``maybe.'' Ten minutes into the program, they were out of questions. [Laughter.] I remember Russell Long. I remember during the Reagan landslide, I was going to be chairman of the Finance Committee. I did not know how to tell Russell--and I did not. I said, ``Who is going to tell Russell?'' Nobody was going to tell Russell. Dave Durenberger was there, and I remember the first vote we had. I got to sit in the chair, but when they called the roll, they called the minority side first and then the other side. They said, ``Mr. Chairman,''--this was my first time--and he voted ``aye.'' It is a true story. Then there is Phil Hart and Dan Inouye. We all met in Battle Creek, MI, at the Percy Jones General Hospital-- Lieutenant Colonel Hart, Lieutenant Inouye, and Lieutenant Dole. We were all patriots. The best bridge player at Percy Jones Hospital was Dan Inouye. Probably one of the best men I ever knew was Phil Hart. He had a flesh wound in his right elbow area, and from morning to night he spent his time running errands or getting tickets for patients to the Detroit Tigers games. His wife was Jane Briggs. It was Briggs Stadium-- Briggs owned the Tigers at that time. There was not anything that Phil Hart would not do--not only there but when he came to the U.S. Senate. So I left my proxy with the last of the Percy Jones General Hospital caucus, with Dan Inouye. I wrote him a letter today, I said you've got my proxy. If anything comes up regarding Percy Jones General Hospital, which is closed---- [Laughter.] vote me present. [Laughter.] I could go on and on. I am not like Senator Byrd because nobody can do it the way Senator Byrd does it. But I think of all of these people who have come and gone and of all of the new bright stars that are here today on both sides of the aisle, and there is one thing that you do know for certain. This is a great institution. I have learned another thing that we have all learned in this Chamber and this town. Your word is your bond. If you do not keep your word around here, it does not make much difference what your amendment may be, or whatever it may be. And it is important to all of us. As far as I know everybody that I know on either side observed that rule. It is true in any business or in any profession. It is more true in politics because the American people are looking at us, and they want us to tell the truth. It does not mean that we have to agree. It does not mean we cannot have different motivations. I learned that leadership is a combination of background and backbone. I learned a lot about that from the likes of Senator Byrd and others that I watched and watched. I know that Senator Warner is the first person to ever mention to me--one day we were at the same place having lunch. He said, ``You ought to think about running for leader.'' I said, ``Me?'' So I thought about it. [Laughter.] I thought Ted Stevens was going to be the leader. Where is Ted? Something happened on the way to the vote. [Laughter.] I walked out of there surprised. When Howard Greene held up his hand, I knew that I must be the leader. So I would just say that we all know how the political process works. Some people are cynical. Some people think it is awful. Some people do not trust us. But the people who watch this thing day in and day out have a better understanding. Some people ask me. I remember the Speaker--the Speaker is present-- telling me just 10 minutes ago, he really understands now more about the Senate. We have different rules. I love the House of Representatives. I never wanted to be in the House of Representatives. I wanted to be in the Senate. I wanted to be in the Senate where you can have unlimited debate, where any Senator on either side on any issue can stand up and talk until they drop. The record is held by the Presiding Officer, Senator Thurmond.

Mr. DOLE. That is why you are seldom asked to be an after dinner speaker. [Laughter.] Mr. President, I think sometimes around here we think we have to have everything. ``We have to have total victory. I will not settle for less. It has to be my way, or no way.'' Well, Ronald Reagan said once, ``If I can get 90 percent of what I want, I would call that a pretty good deal.'' Ninety percent is not bad. You can get the other 10 percent later. It is a small amendment then. [Laughter.] Better understand that--take the 90 and then work on the 10. I want to say, too, that I read that my resignation and my decision to leave caused astonishment in some quarters, and I do not begrudge anyone their surprise. But I would just want to disabuse anybody about the Senate. This is the great opportunity, and there are hundreds and hundreds and thousands and thousands of people who would give anything they had to be a Member of this body. That is the way it should be. It is very competitive. So I have said the truth is that I would no more distance myself from the Senate than I would from the United States itself. This is a body that is the reflection of America. It is what America is all about. We come from different States and different backgrounds with different opportunities and different challenges in our lives. And, yes, the institution has its imperfections and occasional inefficiencies. We are like America; we are still a work in progress in the U.S. Senate. So I would say to my colleagues that I remember way back when I ran for the Kansas Legislature. We had a Democratic law librarian who thought young people ought to get involved in politics. She found two Republicans and two Democrats, and talked us into running for the State legislature. We did not know anything about politics. We did not know what party we were in. We were students; veterans going to school under the GI bill. I thought about which party to belong to. I have said in jest, from time to time I went back to my hometown and went up to the courthouse and found out there were more Republicans than Democrats. And I became a committed Republican. [Laughter.] It is not quite accurate. But my parents were Democrats. I remember the first time I was ever approached by a reporter. Here I was a brandnew law student, a brand new legislator. I did not know anything about anything. They said, ``Well, what are you going to do now for your district?'' Or something of that case. I said, ``I am going to sit around and watch for a couple of days, and then stand up for what is right.'' Well, that is what we all do around here. I hope I have done it over the years. I will take a minute or two to indulge in some of the things that we all have different interests in. I have been deeply involved in agriculture, as many of you have here, because Kansas is a farm State. When I came to Congress, I was on the House Agriculture Committee. I have been on the Senate Agriculture Committee ever since. So I am proud of having served the farm families of Kansas and around America who make a lot of sacrifices. This year we did not have a wheat crop, hardly at all, in Kansas because of the drought. I am advised by Senator Dorgan that they are not going to have much of one because of the rains and the water. So farmers make a lot of sacrifices. I remember back during the Vietnam debate. Some of us were here. Some were on each side of the issue. The so-called Cooper-Church amendment that went on and on and on, week after week after week on whether we ought to withdraw our troops, or shut off funding, which I thought was wrong. As I look back on it, I think I was right because we had courageous men like Bob Kerrey, John McCain, and others in this Chamber who were risking their lives, and they deserved our support. That was a big debate at the time. I have also been proud to be involved in nutrition programs. Somebody mentioned that earlier today. I remember working with Senator McGovern on that, and there was a conservative article saying I cannot be a conservative because I know George McGovern. I think George McGovern is a gentleman and has always been a gentleman. But we worked together on food stamps. I will confess, when I made my first tour with George McGovern, I said, ``This guy is running for President.'' I was not convinced. There were a lot of skeptics in this Chamber; probably some on each side. You cannot have truer motives. It is always something political. But after being on that trip about 2 or 3 days, I changed my mind. Senator Hollings from South Carolina was in the forefront of that effort. He remembers how bad it was. So we worked together on food stamps, the WIC Program, and the School Lunch Program, particularly when it affected poorer Americans. I think, as I look at it, that no first-class democracy would treat its people like second-class citizens. I remember standing on this floor managing the Martin Luther King holiday bill. We had the majority. It was a proud day for me. It is now a national holiday. The first speech I ever made on the floor was April 14, 1969, about disabled Americans. There are a lot of people in this room who have worked on this program. I know Senator Kennedy and Senator Harkin and Senator Durenberger, when he was here, and Senator Jennings Randolph before--maybe before many of you came--was in the forefront. We stood with many who could not stand on their own, and the highlight was passing the Americans With Disabilities Act. Forty-three million Americans--they are not all seriously disabled, but there are many in wheelchairs, many who cannot even sit up. It was a very impressive sight to be at the White House the day that bill was signed by President Bush, and I am forever grateful. I know Senator Kennedy and Senator Harkin are. Have you ever seen so many wheelchairs at the White House at a signing ceremony? Never. And now more and more Americans with disabilities are full participants in the process. They are in the mainstream. So, I remember in 1983--I know Pat Moynihan remembers--we were standing right over in this aisle. We had a bipartisan commission on Social Security. We had met week after week, month after month. It was about to go down the drain. We had about given up. Everybody was disgusted. We were getting short-tempered. We were Democrats and Republicans. At the time the late John Heinz was a member of the commission. As member of the Finance Committee, I was a member. Senator Moynihan was a member. And Senator Moynihan--I think just by chance or fate or whatever--and I happened to meet in this aisle on my right. We said we have to try one more time to rescue Social Security--one more time. It was not a partisan issue. And we did. That afternoon we convened three more people, we had five of the commission, and it was not long until we were back on track. We finally made it happen, and 37 million people have gotten their checks on time. I think I read in the Washington Post just this weekend, Social Security is going to be in pretty good shape until the year 2029. So that is a pretty good fix. Maybe, as I said earlier in the day, that is a pattern we can follow for Medicare for the long-term solution: Take it out of politics as we did on Social Security, make it work, make it solvent. And the people who get the credit are the people who get the checks--37 million of them. So, we reached across partisan lines. So, I worry a little about the future. I worry about our defenses. I know there are a lot of very talented people here who are going to continue to do that. I am not here to make a partisan speech or even a partisan reference, but I would hope that we would keep in mind there are still threats around the world and also keep in mind that we are the envy of the world. I learned, meeting with a lot of leaders, foreign leaders, as leaders get to do in this business--the chairmen of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senators Helms and Pell and others, Senator Lugar when he was chairman--I remember when the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet empire collapsed, a lot of people started coming to America. They were leaders. They were young and they were old and they were men and they were women, and they did not come for foreign aid. The cynics said, ``Oh, they are coming after more of our money.'' They knew we did not have any. But for the first time in 70 years, in some cases, they had a right to travel. They could get on an airplane without checking with the government and waiting for a year or 2 years or 3 years. They could go to church, they could vote--all these basic rights that we take for granted. And they came to America. Some are now Presidents, like Lech Walesa, some are leaders of their party. As they came to our offices, and I am certain it was true in every other office, they did not ask for money. They wanted to come to America to see America. They wanted to take a look at America. And I can recall almost everyone who left my office, sometimes with tears streaming down their cheeks, saying, ``We want to be like America.'' We are the envy of the world. That is why so many people want to be like we are. So, we have lit Liberty's torch with a glow that can truly light the world. That is what America is all about. We are much more than a place on a map. We are the United States, and we are a beacon of hope. We are a magnet for the oppressed and a shield against those who would put the soul itself in bondage. I think we did that in Kuwait, and we may be called on to do it again. But I would guess one thing. I would hope, when they catalog all the amendments and all the bills and do all the commentaries, whenever it is all over for us here, that we have left our children something other than a legacy of debt. Our children are important. None of us have a perfect solution, but there has to be some solution here where we can come together, Republicans and Democrats, because everybody loves their children. Everybody loves their grandchildren. We have all these young pages here. We have an example every day of young people who want to get ahead, who are willing to work. They just want the opportunity. I think, if I could hope that anything might happen, it probably will not happen today, but this year or next year--I felt strongly about the balanced budget, but not enough people did. But that will be around. So I would close with, again, thanking all of my colleagues. I do not believe--I am just trying to think back--I do not believe we have ever had any real disagreements. I remember one time, I remind the Democratic leader, that I offered an amendment that you thought you were going to offer, and I made a mistake. I was not trying to one-up the Senator from South Dakota. So I withdraw my amendment. Then he offered the amendment. I think that is called civility. So, I would close with the words of my hero, Dwight Eisenhower, because he was our supreme commander. He also came from Abilene, KS; born in Texas but quickly moved to Kansas. He was only 2 years old. It took a while. But, in any event--this is his quote. As we peer into society's future, we--you and I--and our Government--must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow. I think those words are just as good today as they were 35 years ago when President Eisenhower spoke them. We can lead or we can mislead as the people's Representatives, but whatever we do, we will be held responsible. We are going to be held responsible and accountable. I am not talking about 1996. I am talking about any time over the next century. So the Bible tells us that to everything there is a season, and I think my season in the Senate is about to come to an end. But the new season makes this moment far less the closing of one chapter than the opening of another. We all take pride in the past, but we all live for the future. I agree with prairie poet Carl Sandburg, who told us: Yesterday is wind gone down, a sun dropped in the West. I tell you that there is nothing in the world, Only an ocean of tomorrows, A sky of tomorrows. Like everybody here, I am an optimist. I believe our best tomorrows are yet to be lived. So I, again, thank you. God bless America, and God bless the U.S. Senate. [Applause, Senators rising.]

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. I appreciate very much the resolution just passed. Will it be in big letters or neon? I know it cannot have any political advertising on it. Just have the name out there in lights the next few months. I thank all of my colleagues.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, last Wednesday the Medicare trustees released their report on the state of the Medicare trust fund, and the report was grim. Instead of going bankrupt in 2002, as they previously forecasted, the trustees conclude that Medicare will go bankrupt in 2001--just 5 years from now. For the past year and a half, this Republican Congress has attempted to deal honestly and forthrightly with the impending Medicare meltdown. We put forward a budget that would protect, preserve, and strengthen Medicare by reducing its unsustainable rate of growth, while still allowing for a healthy growth rate. We did not claim that our plan was perfect or that it solved the long-term problem. But it was a real attempt to alleviate a crisis that will immediately impact 37 million seniors and disabled Americans, and will have repercussions on tens of millions more. In May 1995, I called for a bipartisan Commission to be set up to save Medicare similar to the one that saved Social Security. Unfortunately the White House dismissed the idea and decided to attack Republican plans to save the Medicare system. That is why I rise today to introduce the Medicare Restoration Act to establish a blue-ribbon bipartisan advisory commission to help deal with this crisis. In my view, leadership means more than just talking about problems. It also means doing something to solve them. This Commission will be responsible for reviewing the current, short- term and long-term condition of the Medicare Trust funds. The Commission will be composed of 15 members appointed by the President, Senate, and House of Representatives. The members of this commission will be from both political parties, because it is clear to me that if we are to be successful we must put politics aside and work on a bipartisan basis. Unfortunately, President Clinton has been unwilling to do that. In February 1995, President Clinton submitted a budget that contained no provisions for saving Medicare. In April 1995, the Medicare trustees--three of whom are members of his administration--issued their original report and urged ``prompt, effective and decisive action.'' The administration instead chose to attack Republican plans to save the system. Last March, the President submitted a budget which, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would only stave off Medicare's bankruptcy for one more year. It is an undeniable fact that the Republican proposal allowed Medicare spending per beneficiary to increase from $4,800 per person to $7,200 per person over 7 years. It is also an undeniable fact that in their ill-fated health care reform proposal, the Clinton administration advocated slowing Medicare's rate of growth. Despite these facts, however, the President vetoed our Medicare proposal, and we have heard nothing but attacks on Republicans for slashing and cutting Medicare. And when the President was asked, not long ago at a news conference, why he continued to use these terms even though they are not true, his response was essentially that the media made him do it. With the release of the trustee's report, the inescapable conclusion is that while the rhetoric flew, Medicare was put at further risk. And those who say that talk is cheap should know that 18 months of misleading rhetoric may have gained one side points in the opinion polls, it also put Medicare another $90 billion-plus in the red. The bottom line is that the 37 million Americans who depend on Medicare deserve better. Future generations of Americans who will need Medicare deserve better. I call on the President to come forward and support this bipartisan commission so we can preserve the Medicare Program and to join with Republicans on a bipartisan basis, as I have proposed before, to address this very serious problem. I send the bill to the desk and ask it be appropriately referred. It is cosponsored by Senators Roth, Simpson, Pressler, Hatch, Chafee, and Murkowski, who are on the Senate Finance Committee. I certainly welcome additional cosponsors on either side of the aisle. This will be a bipartisan commission. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, as I prepare to leave an institution in which I have served for over 35 years, I am mindful that in many ways the public has lost confidence in the ability of legislators to represent their interests, not special interests. We should not allow this to continue. Representative Democracy, founded on fair and competitive elections, is at the core of what makes America great. Yet, concern over how we finance elections threatens to erode the trust the American people have in our elected officials. As my colleagues know, Congress has tried repeatedly to grapple with this issue and largely failed. However, I continue to believe that the very nature of the problem makes it difficult to resolve in the normal give and take of the legislative process. In 1990, for example, Senator Mitchell and I appointed a six-member commission of outside experts to look at this issue and report back to us, but the report was unfortunately ignored by Congress. I suggested in 1994 and repeatedly since then that a similar commission be constituted to report back to Congress, but with an important difference. This time, the report should be in the form of recommended legislative language which provides a solution and Congress should have an opportunity for an up and down vote. As my colleagues know, both President Clinton and Speaker Gingrich endorsed a similar concept last year when they met in New Hampshire. I therefore send to the desk a bill that establishes an eight-member commission of outside experts. They would have the broadest possible mandate to think through this problem, come up with solutions and report back to Congress not more than 30 days after the convening of the 105th Congress. The commission will send Congress legislative language for those recommendations on which seven members agree. Congress will consider those recommendations under expedited procedures that mirror the fast- track authorities in our trade laws. I know my colleagues will be grappling with this issue soon. However, I believe that it would be better to take this issue out of what is already a super-heated partisan atmosphere, and allow a bipartisan approach to be developed that Congress cannot ignore. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, last Wednesday the Medicare trustees released their report on the state of the Medicare trust fund, and the report was grim. Instead of going bankrupt in 2002, as they previously forecasted, the trustees conclude that Medicare will go bankrupt in 2001--just 5 years from now. For the past year and a half, this Republican Congress has attempted to deal honestly and forthrightly with the impending Medicare meltdown. We put forward a budget that would protect, preserve, and strengthen Medicare by reducing its unsustainable rate of growth, while still allowing for a healthy growth rate. We did not claim that our plan was perfect or that it solved the long-term problem. But it was a real attempt to alleviate a crisis that will immediately impact 37 million seniors and disabled Americans, and will have repercussions on tens of millions more. In May 1995, I called for a bipartisan Commission to be set up to save Medicare similar to the one that saved Social Security. Unfortunately the White House dismissed the idea and decided to attack Republican plans to save the Medicare system. That is why I rise today to introduce the Medicare Restoration Act to establish a blue-ribbon bipartisan advisory commission to help deal with this crisis. In my view, leadership means more than just talking about problems. It also means doing something to solve them. This Commission will be responsible for reviewing the current, short- term and long-term condition of the Medicare Trust funds. The Commission will be composed of 15 members appointed by the President, Senate, and House of Representatives. The members of this commission will be from both political parties, because it is clear to me that if we are to be successful we must put politics aside and work on a bipartisan basis. Unfortunately, President Clinton has been unwilling to do that. In February 1995, President Clinton submitted a budget that contained no provisions for saving Medicare. In April 1995, the Medicare trustees--three of whom are members of his administration--issued their original report and urged ``prompt, effective and decisive action.'' The administration instead chose to attack Republican plans to save the system. Last March, the President submitted a budget which, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would only stave off Medicare's bankruptcy for one more year. It is an undeniable fact that the Republican proposal allowed Medicare spending per beneficiary to increase from $4,800 per person to $7,200 per person over 7 years. It is also an undeniable fact that in their ill-fated health care reform proposal, the Clinton administration advocated slowing Medicare's rate of growth. Despite these facts, however, the President vetoed our Medicare proposal, and we have heard nothing but attacks on Republicans for slashing and cutting Medicare. And when the President was asked, not long ago at a news conference, why he continued to use these terms even though they are not true, his response was essentially that the media made him do it. With the release of the trustee's report, the inescapable conclusion is that while the rhetoric flew, Medicare was put at further risk. And those who say that talk is cheap should know that 18 months of misleading rhetoric may have gained one side points in the opinion polls, it also put Medicare another $90 billion-plus in the red. The bottom line is that the 37 million Americans who depend on Medicare deserve better. Future generations of Americans who will need Medicare deserve better. I call on the President to come forward and support this bipartisan commission so we can preserve the Medicare Program and to join with Republicans on a bipartisan basis, as I have proposed before, to address this very serious problem. I send the bill to the desk and ask it be appropriately referred. It is cosponsored by Senators Roth, Simpson, Pressler, Hatch, Chafee, and Murkowski, who are on the Senate Finance Committee. I certainly welcome additional cosponsors on either side of the aisle. This will be a bipartisan commission. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, as I prepare to leave an institution in which I have served for over 35 years, I am mindful that in many ways the public has lost confidence in the ability of legislators to represent their interests, not special interests. We should not allow this to continue. Representative Democracy, founded on fair and competitive elections, is at the core of what makes America great. Yet, concern over how we finance elections threatens to erode the trust the American people have in our elected officials. As my colleagues know, Congress has tried repeatedly to grapple with this issue and largely failed. However, I continue to believe that the very nature of the problem makes it difficult to resolve in the normal give and take of the legislative process. In 1990, for example, Senator Mitchell and I appointed a six-member commission of outside experts to look at this issue and report back to us, but the report was unfortunately ignored by Congress. I suggested in 1994 and repeatedly since then that a similar commission be constituted to report back to Congress, but with an important difference. This time, the report should be in the form of recommended legislative language which provides a solution and Congress should have an opportunity for an up and down vote. As my colleagues know, both President Clinton and Speaker Gingrich endorsed a similar concept last year when they met in New Hampshire. I therefore send to the desk a bill that establishes an eight-member commission of outside experts. They would have the broadest possible mandate to think through this problem, come up with solutions and report back to Congress not more than 30 days after the convening of the 105th Congress. The commission will send Congress legislative language for those recommendations on which seven members agree. Congress will consider those recommendations under expedited procedures that mirror the fast- track authorities in our trade laws. I know my colleagues will be grappling with this issue soon. However, I believe that it would be better to take this issue out of what is already a super-heated partisan atmosphere, and allow a bipartisan approach to be developed that Congress cannot ignore. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, today, there is a period for morning business, with the following Senators in control of the designated times: Senator Hollings, 30 minutes; Senator Domenici will be controlling the time from 1 to 3:30; Senator Daschle, or his designee, from 3:30 to 4:30; Senator Coverdell, or his designee, from 4:30 to 5:30. It is hoped that any Senator wishing to speak on the budget resolution conference report will do so today in order to complete action on the budget during tomorrow's session--hopefully before noon-- on that matter. Rollcall votes are possible today. I indicated, I think, on Thursday that we are still trying to clear a number of the nominees. We have cleared some. We have not had much success in the judicial nomination area. I would like, where we can, to dispose of those before I leave the Senate tomorrow. If you want to have a vote, let us have a vote. I hope we can move the nominations that may be on the calendar--maybe with one or two exceptions--so that those people who have been nominated and have had their hearings will be able to pursue their careers. I have suggested that, if we cannot agree on the package, we can start down the list and go one at a time. If people want to vote, we will vote on judge A, judge B, judge C. That way, at least we can dispose of some of those matters. It is also my hope today that we can clear for immediate consideration Calendar No. 253, S. 1438. This deals with the World Trade Organization. In fact, it is an agreement I made with President Clinton. We are talking about passage of the GATT agreement. I was concerned about the World Trade Organization and concerned about there not being enough input from Congress. So there was an agreement between myself and Mickey Kantor, the Trade Representative, and the President, that we would pursue legislation to give Congress additional input and permit Congress, in certain cases, to withdraw--or at least initiate proceedings to withdraw--from the World Trade Organization. It was carefully worked out at one time. At one time, it had cleared on both sides. Senator Byrd had a problem, and I think that problem has now been resolved. I have not asked for much around here, as far as clearing things for myself, although I have done it for other people. I hope we might be able to clear this without amendment today and send it to the House, so the President will have it on his desk for signature--which he is perfectly willing to do. It is my understanding that a new offer will be made with reference to health reform, the bill that passed this body by a large margin. It is still my hope--maybe only a hope--that we can complete action on that matter, if not today, sometime tomorrow. In any event, it is my hope that we can get the agreement. If I am not here to vote on it, I hope we can have the agreement. It is going to take some give on all sides. We cannot have people dictate to us and attack us up in the Press Gallery and expect to make any progress. I will not engage in that myself. I do not think that advances the cause of what we are attempting to do. Hopefully, we can reach some agreement on that today. I will do all I can to make it happen. I think there has to be give and take on each side. I think, in this case, the House has been very forthcoming on a number of issues that we did not want in our bill. It is not in the Senate bill. It is down to the issue of medical savings accounts. The House feels very strongly about it, and I think about half of the Members here feel very strongly about it. So it seems to me that we ought to reach some accommodation on medical savings accounts and send this bill to the President for his signature. I assume he will sign it. There have been a lot of different proposals made--some rather useless, and others that I think have some merit. Hopefully, we can resolve that. I understand Senator Kassebaum will be sending us--and maybe it is in my office now--a counterproposal, on which I will meet and discuss with my House colleagues, in the hopes that we can resolve that, too, before the day is out.

Mr. DOLE. Sure.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts. I understand we have now received a proposal from my colleague, Senator Kassebaum. We are in the process of reviewing that proposal. I am not certain that the Senator from Massachusetts has a copy of it. But it indicates that we might be able to reach some compromise. I would like nothing better if we could conclude that today, have conferees appointed, and come to a satisfactory conclusion because, as the Senator outlined, it affects millions of Americans. It should be done. And maybe--speaking for myself, I would like to have it done before I leave. But at least if that cannot happen, I would like to have the agreement before tomorrow at 2 o'clock, and maybe under the Senate rules we could deem it passed sometime after the House takes it up. I will have to check with the Parliamentarian on that. But if we have something to agree to, everybody in the Senate, as the Senator knows, the original bill passed unanimously--hopefully we could reach some agreement today, and at least have the agreement entered. Then the Senator from Massachusetts, the Senator from Kansas, and others could dispose of it later this week. I thank the Senator.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, if I could use my leader time. Is leader time reserved?

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, on August 4, 1789, in the first year of existence, the U.S. Senate approved legislation to establish the Department of War. In the nearly 207 years since that date, the Senate has always devoted a great deal of attention to matters of national security. Few Senators in that time, however, have devoted as much attention as Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia, who will leave this Senate next January after 24 years of service. While Senator Nunn and I have not agreed on every issue, I am just one of many Republicans who has always respected his expertise and admired his patriotism. I especially recall the affection and admiration which our former colleague Barry Goldwater had for Senator Nunn. During the first 6 years of the Reagan administration, Senator Goldwater and Senator Nunn worked on a bipartisan basis to rebuild America's military. Senator Nunn has also worked with another military expert, Senator Richard Lugar, in working with the former Soviet Republic to relinquish their nuclear weapons. On nondefense matters, I have appreciated Senator Nunn's strong support for a balanced budget amendment, product liability reform, and anticrime and antidrug efforts. The high respect in which Senator Nunn is held in Washington, DC, is echoed in his home State of Georgia. In 1978, Senator Nunn won reelection with 83 percent of the vote. In 1984, he received 80 percent, he ran completely unopposed. It goes without saying, then, that Senator Nunn could have won reelection this year. He has chosen to leave on his own terms, and I have no doubt that his voice will continue to be an important one for many years to come.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I object to further consideration of this bill at this time.

Mr. DOLE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I guess it is hard to pay tribute to my colleague, Senator Kassebaum, because she has done such an outstanding job. And there is no question about it. She is the most popular politician we have had in our State--the most popular ``politician in politics,'' let us put it that way; some do not like the word ``politician''--for years. Over the past several days, I have paid tribute to those colleagues who are retiring from the Senate at the conclusion of the 104th Congress; this is my final tribute. During my years representing Kansas 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--a Senator who was widely respected by Members on both sides of the aisle. For the past 18 years, I have had the privilege of serving alongside another person respected by all Senators for her common sense and integrity--Senator Nancy Landon Kassebaum. Senator Kassebaum is retiring at the end of this session, so she can spend more time with her children and grandchildren. The voters of Kansas, who have cast their ballots for her in overwhelming numbers, understand her desire to come home, but they also understand that this Chamber will be losing one of its most thoughtful and effective Members. Nancy Kassebaum does not speak in a loud voice. She does not clamor for media attention. But as all Senators know, while her voice may be quiet, her will is strong. For 18 years she has simply represented the people of Kansas to the best of her abilities, and she had made a positive difference for Kansas and America in the process. As a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Kassebaum has made a habit of staking out policies that provide to be prophetic. She was instrumental in the policies that helped to move South Africa away from apartheid, and she saw Saddam Hussein as a danger long before many others. As ranking member and then Chair of the Labor and Human Resources Committee, she had fought to return dollars and decisions to the local levels, remembering the words of her father, Alf Landon, who once said, ``There are some smart people in Washington, DC. There are more of them in Topeka.'' Although as of tomorrow, I will no longer be Nancy's colleague, I will still be her constituent. And along with all other Kansans, I will take great pride in being able to say for 6 more months--as I have for 18 years--that Nancy Kassebaum is my Senator.