J. Exon

Mr. EXON

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

Mr. EXON. If we are going to have any order at all, we will have to have that.

Mr. EXON. Did we adopt that?

Mr. EXON. The Senator from Nebraska seeks time off the amendment.

Mr. EXON. It is, and I yield back any time in opposition that we may have on this side.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I am back to see if possibly we could at this time clear the two amendments agreed to earlier. Has the amendment by the Senator from North Carolina been offered? I am prepared to yield back time on the Levin amendment, which we will agree to by a voice vote. I likewise assume we will move forward with the amendment of the Senator from North Carolina, which I assume has been cleared on both sides. I yield back the remainder of the time on the Levin amendment.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask for a vote on the Levin amendment that is now the pending amendment.

Mr. EXON. I am about ready to yield 15 minutes to the Senator from Massachusetts, half of the time. I will be allotted the half hour remaining on the pending matter. Is that correct?

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment before the Senate be temporarily set aside so that we can entertain two amendments by previous agreement, the first to be offered by the Senator from Michigan, the second to be offered by the Senator from North Carolina. Both have been cleared, and we can move ahead on them. I would appreciate very much if the Chair would see fit to recognize the Senator from Michigan at this time for his statement and the introduction of the amendment.

Mr. EXON. I thank my good friend and colleague from the State of Michigan, Senator Levin, for the amendment that I had indicated earlier has been cleared on both sides. This is an important sense-of-the- Senate resolution, and I appreciate the cooperation we have had from Senator Levin and his staff on this matter. We are about ready to have proposed in behalf of Senator Helms from North Carolina an amendment that likewise has been cleared on both sides. Then we can move the adoption of those by voice vote. Awaiting the arrival of one Member on the Senate floor, I suggest the absence of a quorum. Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. EXON. I withhold.

Mr. EXON. I thank the Senator. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. EXON. Maybe we could settle something right now. I am not sure that we should be in session during the important matter that is going to be taking place at the Washington Cathedral. I was just wondering if I might have the attention of my colleague. I am wondering if it might be better for us to recess during the time of the memorial service with the time being charged along the lines just outlined by the chairman of the committee. I just say let us take that under advisement for now. With that, if the Senator from Massachusetts could be recognized at this time as previously arranged.

Mr. EXON

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, just briefly, what this amendment is is a proposition that we have been talking about for a long time, to provide some funding, badly needed funding, for the Amtrak system. The amendment speaks for itself. I simply ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment.

Mr. EXON. May I inquire of my colleague, we have additional debate that was on the matter before the Senate. Do you wish us to finish that or do you want to go ahead? The Senator from South Carolina also wants to speak.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I am about to yield whatever time he might need to the Senator from South Carolina. I wish briefly to respond. How interesting it is that the debate has shifted from the very legitimate discussion that we were having here with regard to the faulty ruling of the Chair to a charge that Democrats are trying to block consideration of income tax reductions. Nothing could be further from the truth. Just repeating irresponsible charges over and over again without providing any backup proof is nonsense. That has been an old debating technique for a long, long time. When the facts are not on your side, talk nonsense. Mr. President, I want to get back, and I am sure my friend from South Carolina wants to get back, to the underlying problem that we have here that is far more than just one single independent ruling of the Chair. It is going to have far-reaching adverse effects on the U.S. Senate for as long as we can imagine into the future. Instead of addressing that, the Republicans come forth with charts. They say we are trying to stop the tax cut. We are not trying to stop the tax cut. All we want is the tax cut to be brought up in the usual fashion, to be debated in the usual fashion under the usual procedures. We are trying to expose this glaring trick that the Republicans are trying, by separating their reconstruction instructions into three separate bills. The last one with regard to tax cuts would come in September of this year, a couple months before the election. Of course, I would be the last to accuse the Republicans of playing politics with this --let me be the first. We have just seen some charts presented here. They have done this before. They set up a straw man on fake straw and then they tear it down. They just had a list of Senators up there. They totaled up what those Senators had proposed and how much it would cost. No one has advocated raising taxes by the amount asserted from the Senator from Missouri. It is simply not the case that one can add up all of the offsets for amendments that fail. If the Senate chooses not to use an offset in one amendment, it is perfectly legitimate to try and use the same offset in a second amendment. When we do that, the Republicans set up a straw man--false numbers, false charges, false assumptions. Once again, setting up a straw man may fool the people of the United States temporarily, but not for long. I want to correct just one more thing. I want to correct the record on the statistics used by the Senator from Texas. The share of the economy that goes to revenues to fund the Government is not at record levels. Let me repeat that: The Senator from Texas said that the share of the economy that goes to revenues to fund the Government is not at record levels. It was higher in 1969. It was higher in 1970. It was higher in 1982. Sure, sure, we would all like to have lower taxes. The question is, what should come first? What should come first, Mr. President? Balancing the budget of the United States or enacting tax cuts that we all would likely vote for once we get a balanced budget? I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from South Carolina.

Mr. EXON. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor. How much time would the Senator from Washington like?

Mr. EXON. With that understanding, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes at this time to the Senator from Delaware. I believe under the rules he will be talking on an amendment, so the time should be charged on the amendment, which takes it jointly off of each side's time.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I would like to advise the chairman of the committee we have good news; a Senator has arrived in the Chamber to talk about an amendment. The amendment was previously offered but the Senator from Florida seeks recognition, and at this time I hope we could allot him 5 minutes charged jointly against the two sides. Mr. GRAHAM addressed the Chair.

Mr. EXON. I yield 2 more minutes.

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, just to add another fact to the statement made by the distinguished Senator from South Carolina, that largest tax cut in history that he indicated came in 1982, I believe. Is that what he said?

Mr. EXON. Mr. President, I yield 2 minutes from our time to the Senator from South Carolina. Point of Order

Mr. EXON

Mr. EXON. (for Mr. Roth for himself and Mr. Exon) proposed an amendment to the concurrent resolution, Senate Concurrent Resolution 57, supra; as follows: At the appropriate place insert the following: