Wendell Ford

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. With that understanding, Mr. President, I do not think anybody has any problem with that at all. I do have some colleagues that would like to make some remarks. And listening to the majority leader, you may have somebody that would like to come over and make some remarks too after these three Senators have on our side.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, the argument of the majority leader is not with us here on this side. It is with Representative Stark over there, because we are not in--as he said, our dog is not in that fight. We do believe, however, that this drug for arthritis is one that, if you keep this language in the bill, will be manufactured for 2 more years and the price will be up. It will not be a generic drug. That is our legislative problem with this and not an argument between the majority leader and Representative Stark. I think they should not jump on us. I think we will come together on it. But the other side of the coin is there is a legislative problem that we would like to try to work out if we could as it relates to the bill. If that is possible, we will try to do that. I do not like personalities at all. I do not like this, taking another Member on in the press. I think it is wrong. I will defend myself. I am just as political as the next person, but I try, as best I can, not to be personal. I think it is unfortunate.

Mr. FORD. Drug patent.

Mr. FORD. Yes. I will be delighted.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mrs. KASSEBAUM addressed the Chair.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I know what the objection would be. The reason it has been brought up is because there would be an objection, and the objection was made last night. The finger pointing has gone too far here. I think we need to call a quorum, wipe the sweat off, and try to work things out instead of pointing fingers at each other. We are getting too harsh. The majority leader is working hard, trying to make this thing work, and then we have people jumping up and down fussing back and forth. It is time it stopped. It is time it stopped. I yield the floor.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Would the Senator yield?

Mr. FORD

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

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. It's not here yet.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I was not privileged to the agreement among the distinguished Senator from Texas and New Jersey and our leader. So I am somewhat in a difficult spot here this morning. I will have to wait until the leader has arrived. He is not here at the moment, and we all understand why he is not, and also the Senator from New Jersey. Two things happened. I remember the distinguished Senator from Texas making a statement on the floor about how much stronger her bill was after the Lautenberg amendment was attached, and you made a very strong statement about the bill as it left here. The bill was only passed last week. We have been trying to get bills passed for 8, 9, and 10 months. So it was just passed last week. The problem in the House, as I understand, was they tried to strip the Lautenberg amendment from the stalking bill, and that is where it ran into trouble. The day is not over and tomorrow is not over, as the majority leader has said. Maybe things can work out. I am willing to help in any way I can, but I am somewhat at a disadvantage, if I may use that as a tool here. I will work with the majority leader, as Senator Daschle has. So I think what I am saying is correct here, that attempting to take the Lautenberg amendment off the stalking bill last night caused the problems, and that was the reason it was not brought up. Today is another day.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Could the Senator do those tomorrow night or tomorrow sometime?

Mr. FORD. Not restrained but constrained.

Mr. FORD. Well, I will have to object to that because the Senator could not attend.

Mr. FORD. I would be constrained.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, next Monday evening will mark the 39th annual Red Saltsman picnic in Sorgho, KY. For a few hours that evening a little town of less than 100 people will be the hot spot for the evening; host to thousands of people listening to good music, eating barbecue and bringing each other up to date on the latest political happenings. It's all thanks to the good will of Katherine and Red Saltsman who 39 years ago just wanted to say thanks to the regulars at their restaurant known as the fish house of the south. That little picnic for family and friends just sort of grew. Now, you'll not only find friends and patrons of Red's restaurant, but politicians beating a path to the picnic as well. They know that if they want to get their message out, they have to first convince the political movers and shakers who come to Red's. But perhaps the best things about this picnic is that no matter how big the picnic gets, it's always Red's picnic. Oh there's a bigger spread and it's become a permanent stop on the Kentucky campaign trail, but the good intentions of one man and his family to say thanks and give back to the community are still at the heart of this picnic. Red and his family are pillars of this community. They're constantly doing far more than their part to ensure Kentucky is the kind of place each of us can call home. And so in a way, this picnic reminds us how much we each can do to make our communities thrive. And for that reason--more than the good food and music--we are all grateful to Red Saltsman.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, let me say to the majority leader on behalf of the Democratic leader that we intend to cooperate with him as much as we can, but I might say to the majority leader, as he understood, the Democratic leader was quite upset last night when one of the judges had an objection. That level of cooperation kind of broke open last night. So I just want to advise the majority leader that we will be attempting to continue to help him through the day, but it received a bump last evening.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I thank my friend from New Mexico for allowing me to have a couple minutes. Mr. President, I think we need to be very careful to put this bill into perspective. Yes, it will modify a system that no one defends. Yes, it will give States more flexibility to deal with their poorest citizens. Yes, it will provide more for child care than H.R. 4, easing one of the greatest barriers for those on welfare who want to work. All of these things are good reasons for supporting this bill. But I find some of the predictions of what this bill will do to be a bit of a stretch. It is being suggested by some that this bill will reduce the poverty rate, the illigitimacy rate, the teen pregnancy rate, the crime rate, and just about every other kind of rate you can imagine. We hear that this bill provides dynamic opportunities for education and training and is the opportunity that people who are poor in this country have been asking for. Well, I hope the strongest supporters of this bill are right. Sometimes I wonder when I listen to some of these speeches just how many poor people some of my colleagues have ever met. Maybe they could come to eastern Kentucky. Maybe then they could understand how difficult it is to determine whether a lack of personal responsibility or a lack of opportunity is the greater cause of poverty. For those of us in the middle of the political spectum, this is a tough vote. When I hear some of the predictions about what this bill will do, I am skeptical. I have a hard time figuring out how it will affect my State. We have been doing some innovative things in Kentucky with welfare reform. We are one of the 10 States left that has not obtained a Federal waiver from welfare laws--something you hear so much about in Washington today. Yet we are 1 of the top 10 States in reducing our welfare rolls--reducing welfare rolls without a waiver--23-percent reduction since January 1993. We have tried a lot of things to put people to work. Our current Governor is looking at even broader changes--maybe this bill will allow him to do most things without having to worry about a waiver request, and that is a good thing. But when I talk to those in my State about why our welfare rolls have come down, the most important reason I hear about is the improvement in the economy. I remember how tough the vote was in 1993 on the deficit reduction package. I believe that vote had a lot to do with the strength of our economy today. In many ways, that bill may have been much more important in reducing welfare rolls and putting people to work than the welfare bill before us today. And speaking of predictions, I remember the predictions that opponents of deficit reduction made in 1993. They said the 1993 deficit reduction package would cause a recession, cost jobs, increase inflation, cause interest rates to rise, fail to reduce the deficit below $200 billion, and shake up the stock market. Guess what, Mr. President? Our friends who made these predictions were zero for six. That kind of batting average won't even get you in the minor leagues. Just this morning, we learned that the economy grew in the second quarter at an extremely strong annual rate of 4.2 percent. We have a healthy, growing economy, and the deficit has been cut from $290 billion to $117 billion and may go below that. These are important reasons why the welfare rolls are down in my State by 23 percent. Some of our colleagues who made those wrong predictions about the 1993 deficit reduction package are the same ones making the boldest predictions about what this welfare bill will do. So I am skeptical. I am willing to support, and will support, this conference report for the steps it takes in the right direction. But we need to monitor the impact of this bill very carefully. About the only thing we know for sure is that it will reduce the growth in welfare spending by about $55 billion over the next 6 years. We hope it will achieve some of the other things that are being predicted today, and at least give our Governors and State legislatures more flexibility in experimenting and designing programs which address poverty. I hope that we will see more success at the State level. But somehow, I am also quite certain that as we monitor the impact of this bill, we will quickly find out that this is not the end of the welfare reform debate, and that future Congresses will find there is much more work to be done. I thank the Chair and yield the floor. Mr. DOMENICI addressed the Chair.

Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Pryor] is necessarily absent.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Pryor] is necessarily absent.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Johnston], the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Pryor], and the Senator from Illinois [Mr. Simon], are necessarily absent.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. Now, Mr. President, I ask for its second reading, and I will object to my own request on behalf of Senators on the Republican side of the aisle.

Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I understand that S. 2007, introduced today by Senator Biden, is at the desk and I ask for its first reading.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Glenn] is necessarily absent.

Mr. FORD

Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Pell] is necessarily absent. I also announce that the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Pell] is absent because of a funeral. I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. Pell] would vote ``nay.''