T. Gorton

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Unlike inspections conducted on overland sections of pipeline, the inspector would need specialized knowledge to properly determine the structural integrity and soundness of, say, a cable suspension bridge, in addition to that of the pipeline. This would probably include an understanding of and training in: steel fabrication, structural engineering fundamentals, pipeline behavior under operating pressure, the characteristics of all cable types used in suspension bridges, and the characteristics of reinforced concrete foundation structures.

Mr. GORTON. Regardless of location, type of pipeline, size or terrain, a program to maintain and inspect the integrity of all pipelines is required to ensure the public safety, environmental protection and reliability of the infrastructure. In fact, the agency should be consulting with the bridge inspection specialists in the various other Federal and State agencies.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate immediately proceed to executive session to consider the nominations reported by the Armed Services Committee during today's session. I further ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, any statements relating to the nominations be printed in the Record, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I understand that S. 3021 is at the desk. I ask for its first reading.

Mr. GORTON. I ask for its second reading and object to my own request.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration of the nominations of Senator Biden and Senator Grams to be representatives to the General Assembly of the United Nations and, further, that the nominations be placed on the calendar.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until the hour of 10 a.m. on Friday, September 8. I further ask that on Friday, immediately following the prayer, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then resume debate on H.R. 4444, the China PNTR legislation.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 696, S. 2901.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read the third time.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 4919. I further ask consent that the Senate proceed to its consideration, all after the enacting clause be stricken, and the text of S. 2901 be inserted in lieu thereof. I ask that the bill then be read the third time and passed, as amended, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to the bill be printed in the Record. Further, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate then insist on its amendments, request a conference with the House, and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate and, finally, that S. 2901 be placed back on the calendar.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, at 10 a.m., the Senate will resume debate on the China trade bill. Amendments are expected to be offered and debated throughout the day. As previously announced, there will be no votes during tomorrow's session of the Senate. Therefore, any votes ordered with respect to the China PNTR bill will be scheduled to occur on Monday or Tuesday of next week. If significant progress can be made during tomorrow's session, votes may be delayed until Tuesday morning, September 12. Therefore, those Senators who have amendments to H.R. 4444 are encouraged to come to the floor during Friday's session.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, after a refreshing though strenuous August recess, we are now in the home stretch not only of this session of Congress but of this Congress. The previous speaker discussed one of the great national and international priorities, normal trade relations with China on a permanent basis. I have several other priorities, both national and regional, that I will discuss, each of which I think is vitally important for the successful conclusion of this Congress of the United States. At the very top of my list is pipeline safety. More than a year ago, a tragic accident in Bellingham, WA, occurred with a liquid pipeline. A huge explosion snuffed out the lives of three bright young people and destroyed a magnificent and beautiful park. Ever since the date of that accident, my colleague from the State of Washington and I have focused a great deal of attention on the renewal and the strengthening of the Pipeline Safety Act and of the Office of Pipeline Safety, designed to enforce its restrictions. We have succeeded in passing a relatively strong Pipeline Act reauthorization through the Senate Commerce Committee with certain objections, with a number of amendments that were seriously contested and closely divided in that committee. We have now worked diligently with all concerned and I believe we are on the verge of a bill that can come before this Senate and can be passed enthusiastically, and I believe unanimously, by the Senate of the United States. It is imperative that we do so quite promptly because while the House has begun to focus attention on the issue, time is very short before the end of this Congress to actually accomplish the goals we seek in increasing pipeline safety. A dramatic and equally tragic incident during the course of the last month with a national gas pipeline in New Mexico has illustrated most regrettably, once again, the essential nature of our improving pipeline safety standards all across the United States. I am focused particularly on giving a more significant voice in pipeline safety matters to the people who live in the vicinity of these pipelines and whose lives regrettably seem to be very much at risk with respect to either negligence or oversight on the part of those who own and operate these pipelines. Pipelines, both for natural gas and for the transmission of liquid petroleum products, are a vitally important part of our economy. In some respects, they are safer than other forms of transportation for these commodities. However, accidents are all too frequent, and all too frequently those accidents are devastating and fatal in nature. The importance of passing this legislation cannot be overemphasized. I am highly optimistic on this subject. I had an extensive discussion last evening with the majority leader and have his encouragement. I believe in the course of the next few days we will be able to take up this bill. Regrettably, on another high national priority, I find myself frustrated that we have not made a sufficient degree of progress. A number of days, over a period of weeks and months, have been devoted in this body to a debate on education policy and a renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. For all practical purposes, that bill is being frustrated by extended discussion, led by the unalterable opposition to providing more trust and confidence in our local school authorities on the part of the Democratic leadership and the senior Senator from Massachusetts. An integral part of the bill, which is still before this body and which has majority support, is Straight A's. Straight A's gives State school authorities several options: One, to continue under the present system. Two, for a dozen or so States to combine a dozen or more present categorical aid programs into one system that comes to the State, is passed through with at least 95 percent of the money to individual school districts on one undertaking and one undertaking only, and that undertaking is that each State that would get this authority will sign a contract pursuant to which there will be an improvement in the skills of the students over a 5-year period; that is to say, by any objective measure that the State uses, our kids will be better educated. It is a dramatic change. It is a change from process accountability, the form of accountability we have at the present time--that is to say: Did you fill out the forms correctly?--to results accountability: Are our children better educated? I am convinced and a majority of this body is convinced that by providing more trust and confidence in parents and teachers and principals and school board members--the people who know our children's names--that the students' education will improve. There is still time to pass such a bill. I regret the opposition even to a test, optional to each State, is so great it seems unlikely that this vitally important education reform will be passed. Just last week I spoke to the junior and senior classes at Bridgeport High School, a rural school in Washington State, a very small school, not more than 100 students and faculty combined. They do not need more Federal rules and regulations. They don't need to be told they should use the newest Federal program to hire roughly half a teacher, which is what they get under that program. They need our trust and confidence in the dedicated nature of those teachers and administrators and parents in that community, who know better than we do here in Washington, DC, what the students of Bridgeport, WA, need. The same thing is true of 17,000 other school districts across the United States. I also note present on the floor today my distinguished friend and colleague from North Dakota. He and I are joined in at least two other priorities with which we are dealing this year. One is the opportunity to end unilateral boycotts against the export of food and medicines from the United States. We represent, I am convinced, a substantial majority of the Members of the Senate, as well as the House of Representatives. We have a termination to those boycotts in the Agriculture appropriations bill that is now before our conference committee. I know he joins with me in believing that it is absolutely essential, and long overdue, that we end those agricultural boycotts at the present time and provide additional markets to American farmers and agricultural producers as at least one modest step toward returning prosperity to the agricultural sector of our economy. We are also joined in believing that Americans are overcharged for prescription drugs, that we have a system under which American pharmaceutical companies--who benefit from very large subsidies, both indirectly from the National Institutes of Health, and directly through tax credits for the development of prescription drugs--that when those companies charge Americans twice as much or more than twice as much for those drugs as they charge, for all practical purposes, almost anyone outside the United States, that something is absolutely wrong. Again, we have passed in this body at least a significant step in the direction of correcting that injustice. I think it is very important that the appropriations bill to which that important matter is attached be passed and we make at least a significant step, a genuine step forward toward fair and nondiscriminatory treatment of all Americans in the cost of the prescription drugs that are so important to their health. On two other subjects, this body has passed a bill attempting to ensure the reliability of our electrical transmission system and the supply of electricity to all the people of the United States. We have had unwarranted price hikes. We have had both the existence and threat of brownouts in various parts of this country this year. That situation is only going to get worse until we do something about it. A noncontroversial but vitally important electricity reliability bill has passed this body. I urge my colleagues in the House of Representatives to do the same. Finally, on a regional issue, the great issue in the Pacific Northwest is the future of our hydroelectric dam system on the Columbia and Snake Rivers, and particularly the four dams on the lower Snake River. Many in this administration have pursued the foolish goal of removing those dams in order, the administration asserts, to save salmon. Nothing could be less cost effective as against the many absolutely first rate programs that are going on in the Pacific Northwest directly to that end, programs that not at all incidentally have been remarkably successful if we measure them by this year's return of spring chinook salmon to the Columbia River system. The administration and the Vice President have blinked in this connection, knowing the proposal is as unpopular as it is absurd in the Pacific Northwest. One group in the administration said it would be off the table for 8 years. However, the chairman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality was cited in the course of the last month saying that moratorium will only be for 3 years, and the Vice President is not guaranteeing 3 years but just, ``as long as it [the present system] works.'' My own view is that that is until after the November election. So to the best of my ability to do so, the administration will be given the opportunity to put its money where its mouth is with a prohibition against its using any money in the appropriations bill for fiscal year 2001, not only for removing the dams but for any step or purpose on the road to removing those dams. The debate over salmon recovery, a universal goal in the Pacific Northwest, will be far more constructive and far more productive when that particular view is taken off of the agenda in its entirety. Finally, as the Senator responsible for the management of the Interior appropriations bill, we must, of course, deal with the remaining fires across the United States in our forests and on our rangelands, and particularly again in the Northwest part of the United States from which my State has not been entirely free but with which it has not been afflicted to the extent that Montana, Idaho, and certain other States have been. Whatever our concerns about the causes of those fires, the expenditures that have been made and are to be made in connection with their suppression are a genuine emergency and will be included in the conference committee report on the Interior Department bill as an emergency. At the same time, due to the very hard work of my friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Idaho, there are dramatic changes in fire prevention policies which will also be included in that bill that are vitally important to see to it that we do not soon have a repetition of the disastrous fires that have consumed so many hundreds of thousands, even millions of acres of our public and private lands during the course of this summer. Mr. President, that is an ambitious agenda, but I believe it to be a vitally important agenda, not only for my own constituents but for the people of the United States as a whole.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, imagine 140 students who want to spend their summer learning math. For students participating in the Summer Math Program at Thomas Jefferson High School in Federal Way, Washington, this is just the case. For the past five years, Tom Norris and James Brown have worked tirelessly and created a successful program that has dramatically improved the math skills of hundreds of students. When Mr. Norris and Mr. Brown started the Summer Math Program, they had five students in attendance. Since then, the program has become well-known throughout Thomas Jefferson High School as a resource for students struggling with math or hoping to improve their SAT scores and has grown by leaps and bounds. The Summer Math Program is based on a three part system that includes: Advanced Algebra or Pre-Calculus, an SAT summer program, and ``The Math Team.'' The Advanced Algebra and Pre-Calculus course enables students who desire to complete Calculus before they leave high school to enroll in higher math classes in the following school year. The SAT summer program, offered at a much lower cost than other SAT review classes, equips students with the skills and confidence needed for their college preparatory exams. As a result, Thomas Jefferson High School has some of the highest SAT scores in the South Puget Sound of Washington State. Additionally, students who enjoy competing in math competitions can participate on the Math Team. Students practice throughout the summer in preparation for the annual national competition which took place in July. As a true testament to the excellence of the program, Mr. Norris and Mr. Brown coached the team to a fifth-place victory last summer when the students participated against 50 other schools. This certainly was a great accomplishment for the program and students participating! Samuel Kim, a Math Team member who will be a senior this year, told me that the Math Team, ``keeps you in the right frame of mind during summer so you can keep your math skills strong, and it gives you good interaction with others.'' Samuel had nothing but applause for his coaches stating, ``Mr. Norris is very friendly and inspirational, yet demanding and excited to see us succeed in competition, while Mr. Brown is more light-hearted in his motivational tactics.'' The record of the Math Team and the achievements of students in the Summer Math Program speaks not only to the excellence of the program but also to the efforts and drive of both Mr. Norris and Mr. Brown. Their dedication to education, and math in particular, is rarely paralleled in other local school districts during the summer months. I am impressed with the dedication of these two men to their students' education even during the summer months. It is with great pleasure that I recognize them for their outstanding service to the students of Thomas Jefferson High School.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I would like to bring the Senate's attention today to Mr. Jim Sutton, a man who has given a generation of Kalama students a unique look at the courageous acts of an older generation--the men and women who fought in World War II. Mr. Sutton is the Superintendent of the Kalama School District and also finds the time to teach a course on World War II and the Cold War. Through his great personal interest in WWII and his desire to transfer some of his interest onto his students, Jim has made history come alive for them. Mr. Sutton's class, based on the book Band of Brothers, by Stephen Ambrose, uses firsthand accounts of companies who were a part of D-Day in WWII. Ambrose's book documents the accounts of E Company, which the movie, ``Saving Private Ryan,'' was based. Mr. Sutton has made it possible for his students to meet some of these great men who fought in WWII. Jim has brought an Italian officer that fought Rommel in the African Campaign, a P-51 pilot who brought actual video footage from his wing cameras, a machine gunner who landed at D-Day, and a German soldier who spent two years in a Russian prisoner of war camp. Anyone can see how Mr. Sutton recognizes the sacrifices of the WWII generation and has shared it with others. Most impressive was in June when five of Mr. Sutton's students accompanied him to the opening of the D-Day museum in New Orleans, Louisiana where students were able to meet their history book heroes in person. I have always considered my ``Innovation in Education'' Awards to highlight special people and programs, and this award demonstrates how innovative a typical U.S. history class can be. Mr. Sutton has created a live link between the past and the present for his students. Greg Rayl, Principal of Kalama Middle and High School, who nominated Mr. Sutton for the award adds, ``Too often superintendents are many steps removed from the daily classroom management and operations of their district's schools. Jim not only walks the halls interacting with students and teachers, but teaches as well.'' As an avid reader of history, I am delighted to learn about Mr. Sutton who has gone the extra mile to make history come alive for his students. I ask that the Senate join me in commending Mr. Sutton for his dedication to his students and for bringing two generations together.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, at 10:30 a.m. to hold a hearing.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 6, 2000 at 9:30 a.m., in open session to consider the nominations of Lieutenant General Peter Pace, USMC for appointment to the grade of general and to be commander-in-chief, United States Southern Command; Lieutenant General Charles R. Holland, USAF for appointment to the grade of general and to be commander-in- chief, United States Special Operations Command; and Major General Robert B. Flowers, USA for appointment to the grade of lieutenant general and to be the Chief of Engineers, United States Army.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, for an Oversight Hearing on Upper Payment Limits: Federal Medicaid Spending for Non-Medicaid Purposes.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous that the Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet on Wednesday, September 6, 2000 at 9:30 a.m. in room 485 of the Russell Senate Building to mark up S. 611, the Indian Federal Recognition Administrative Procedures Act and S. 2282, Native American Agricultural Research and Export Enhancement Act of 2000 to be followed by a hearing on S. 2580, a bill to provide for the issuance of bonds to provide funding for construction of Indian schools.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, September 6, 2000, at 10:00 a.m., in Dirksen 226.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts be authorized to meet to conduct a hearing on Wednesday, September 6, 2000 at 2:00 p.m., in SD226.

Mr. GORTON

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

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, on June 15, under the leadership of Chairman McCain, the Senate Commerce Committee passed a bill reauthorizing and amendment the Pipeline Safety Act. This bill is, in my view, the single most important piece of legislation the committee will address this session. Following a June 10, 1999, accident in Bellingham, WA, that killed three children, blackened a magnificent city park, and sent shock waves through the community and State, Senator Murray and I have been working in front of and behind the scenes to see the Federal law regulating the operation of pipelines is changed: that communities and citizens are better informed about pipelines; that States can obtain a clear role in the oversight of interstate pipelines; that the Federal Office of Pipeline Safety adopts more meaningful safety standards; and that funding is increased for Federal and State pipeline safety operations. While we are well on our way to accomplishing this last goal--the Senate has provided a significant increase in funding for the Office of the Pipeline Safety, and I have earmarked matching Federal funds for Washington State to supplement the funds appropriated by the State legislature for expanded safety activities--securing passage of the authorizing legislation has proven more difficult. I come to the floor to tell my colleagues that I will not rest in seeking the enactment of meaningful legislation this year. I am by nature a determined man, and my resolve on this issue has been strengthened by the example set by the Mayor of Bellingham, whose interest in this matter has not been half-hearted or expedient, but who has devoted and continues to devote time, resources, and thought to what we can do to make pipelines safer. I am committed to seeing that his efforts and my own are not in vain. The bill that passed the Commerce Committee is a good one. It makes meaningful changes in Federal law. S. 2438 requires the Federal Office of Pipeline Safety to implement the recommendations of the Inspector General of the Department of Transportation by completing rulemakings that are long overdue, collecting better information to determine the causes of pipeline accidents, and providing better training to OPS inspectors. It accelerates the deadline for operators to prepare plans for training and qualifying their employees. It requires that information about pipeline incidents and safety-related conditions be made available to the public and that operators work with local communities to educate them about the location and risks of pipelines and what to do in case of an accident. The bill increases fines for violations, and explicitly provides a role for States in the oversight of interstate pipelines. It provides more funding for the Office of Pipeline Safety and direction on areas of research and development to focus on to improve safety. In addition, the bill imposes on operators of pipelines of any length--not just longer pipelines as suggested by the administration-- an obligation to conduct risk analyses and to adopt integrity management plans for high consequence areas--plans that provide for periodic assessments of pipelines' integrity. S. 2438 ensures that OPS will have easier access to operator information, and lowers the liquid spill reporting threshold to 5 gallons. It creates a national database of pipeline events and conditions. The bill contains protections for whistle blowers. Significantly, the bill also authorizes the Secretary to create a pilot program for State safety advisory committees to allow for meaningful citizen input into safety issues of local and State concern, and to monitor the performance of the Office of Pipeline Safety. The bill, in summary, substantially improves current law. Unfortunately, in its current form, I am told, the bill will be stopped by a pipeline industry that can prevent its passage by getting any single Member to place a ``hold'' on the bill once the committee report is filed. At another time, however, when the Senate is able to debate the measure, the reforms could be much less palatable to industry. It has already been over a year since the fatal accident in Bellingham, and the public should not have to wait longer for improvements to the federal pipeline law. While I led the effort to defeat amendments offered in the Commerce Committee that I thought undermined this legislation, I recognized then, as I do now, that some of the issues raised by industry should be and must be addressed if we are to enact legislation this year. I have tried, since the committee passed the bill, to understand and address industry concerns in a reasonable manner. While I think we are getting close on a number of issues, I am growing impatient, particularly with the industry's continued opposition to allowing State and local input on pipeline safety issues of local concern. At some point--and this point will come very soon after our return from the August recess--I will ask my colleagues, one by one if necessary, to join me in voting for S. 2438 and a sound manager's amendment. I trust by that time they will be satisfied that the pipeline industry has had a fair opportunity to work out a reasonable compromise and that the time has come for Congress to act in the interest of all Americans.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, on a third and separate subject, during the course of this past week, four Northwest Governors, two Republicans and two Democrats--the Governors of Montana, Idaho, Washington, and Oregon--released a framework that shows great promise toward the recovery of endangered salmon on the Columbia and Snake Rivers. They have done so without recommending that any dams on the Columbia and Snake Rivers be breached and destroyed. I agree wholeheartedly with the following statement from their plan: The region must be prepared in the near term to recover salmon and meet its larger fish and wildlife restoration obligations by acting now in areas of agreement without resorting to breaching the four Snake River dams. That is a reasonable statement. Unfortunately, it is not one which Vice President Gore and the Federal agencies now concerned with salmon enhancement endorse in their countervailing recommendations of today to keep moving forward with plans to destroy those dams. I agree with the bipartisan Governors' plan in many of its elements, including the principle that performance standards must be scientifically based, subject to scientific peer review, reasonably obtainable, and measurable. I agree with the Governors that the National Marine Fisheries Service should work together with local, State, and tribal governments and private landowners on what specific improvements are needed for recovery. I agree with the Governors that we need real leadership and that the President of the United States should appoint one official in the region who will be accountable and who will efficiently oversee Federal agency fish recovery efforts. Over the past decade, we have squandered more than a billion dollars and commissioned dozens of studies that have done little to promote a consensus on how best to save salmon. The Governors and I agree that local salmon recovery plans that avoid Federal methods of duplication and top-down planning are a much more effective method of saving salmon. I agree with the Governors that States should move ahead to designate priority watersheds for salmon and steelhead plans that are to be developed within 1 year and that the Federal agencies should have clear numerical goals so that success may be measured in those watersheds. The appropriations subcommittee of this Congress last year directed the National Marine Fisheries Service to provide numerical goals for all of the listed fish in the Puget Sound and Columbia River regions and a schedule for all other areas and to provide this information to Congress by July 1 of this year. Instead of fulfilling this request, those agencies have said they will not have any goals until the fall of 2001 and that they have only begun the technical recovery planning for any species of fish they seek to recover. In other words, once again the administration says what we ought to do without knowing what those steps are designed to accomplish. I agree with the Governors and their recommendation that the Army Corps of Engineers, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service must develop a long-term management plan to address predation by fish-eating birds and marine mammals, including seals and sea lions, and do so by the end of the year. I agree with the Governors that the National Marine Fisheries Service should work with the region to conduct an intensive study to address the role of the ocean in fish recovery and ask that the management of fish and fresh water reflect new information about the ocean as it is developed. In short, I believe the Governors have a plan that will work. I have supported millions of dollars in salmon recovery money to be given to the States and to local volunteer groups and will work with them. On the other hand, today the National Marine Fisheries Service has come out with its top-down recommendations, recommendations that, I want to point out, once again call for very specific measures and steps to be taken but do not state any goals for recovery and do not allow us to know what they believe success will be or how that success will be measured. In the course of the last week or 10 days, the newspapers in the Pacific Northwest have been filled with statements that the Federal Government had abandoned the idea of dam removal as an element in salmon recovery at least for a decade. And the implication was that they had abandoned it forever. Not so, Mr. President. What does the biological opinion that was issued today say in that respect? It says: The reasonable and prudent alternative requires that further development of breaches as an option is necessary, and it requires the Corps of Engineers by fiscal year 2002 to seek appropriations to complete preliminary engineering and design work by 2005 for potential removal of the four lower Snake River dams. It does that in spite of the fact that: There is considerable uncertainty in assessing the status of listed fish under current conditions, and the alternative of breaching dams is highly dependent on the degree to which there is delayed mortality associated with juvenile fish passage at the dams and whether breaching would help even to answer these uncertainties. Well, we have a set of Federal agencies that have disagreed with one another. The Corps of Engineers, a year ago, reached the conclusion that dam removal was a poor idea. It did so in spite of vastly underestimating, according to the General Accounting Administration, the adverse impacts on the society, the economy, and the environment of the Pacific Northwest. That recommendation was deleted from its formal opinion by orders of the White House. Vice President Gore has visited the State of Washington on three or four occasions during the course of this year. Each time he has been asked to state his opinion on dam removal, including a specific request by one of his supporters, the Governor of Oregon. He has ducked, dodged, and defied any attempt to get him to reach a conclusion on that particular subject. But I think this biological opinion released by the administration today shows what that opinion is. It is very simple: We will fool the people of the Pacific Northwest by saying we have probably abandoned the idea between now and the 8th of November, and then under these recommendations we can change our mind very rapidly when they won't have a direct say over who will manage the next national administration. Contrast that position with the forthright and unconditional pledge of Governor Bush that the removal of our dams, the destruction of our physical infrastructure, is not an option; that we can and will recover the salmon resources in the Pacific Northwest by the use of our imaginations and by following the advice of the people whose lives are affected by these decisions--a view that I believe is entirely consistent with the recommendations this week of the four Governors-- two Republicans and two Democrats, as I have already pointed out--from the Pacific Northwest itself. Well, we do have something to say about this issue. I pledge I will do everything I can between now and the adjournment of this Congress in late September or early October to see to it this administration is not allowed to waste any more money--not a single dollar--on further studies to remove dams on the Columbia-Snake River system. We will call them to account for their own policies. Their own policies now say this decision should be moved down the road. Fine. We will move the whole decision down the road and hope that we will have a President who will be mindful of the views of the people of the Pacific Northwest and, in the meantime, we are not going to let them waste money to build a case for removing dams that ought to stay in place. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.