T. Gorton

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Madam President, I send a group of amendments to the desk and ask that they be reported en bloc and considered en bloc.

Mr. GORTON. Of course, as the senior Senator from Oregon mentioned, this issue is a serious concern of many of my constituents in the southwestern part of my state. I am delighted to have been able to provide funds from this year's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service budget to develop a solution to this problem affecting both of our states.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. goose depredation

Mr. GORTON. The gentleman from Oregon is correct. The $152,000 of study money will be used to continue ongoing studies at Oregon State University and has strong support among farmers in both our states.

Mr. GORTON. Madam President, it was a week ago tomorrow early in the afternoon that the Senate began consideration of the Interior appropriations bill. The distinguished Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd, and I made our opening statements. We passed a handful of agreed amendments, and since then the entire subject matter has dealt with matters totally extraneous to that Interior appropriations bill. According to the minority leader's action, we will have another such extraneous amendment tomorrow. But in the closing of this evening, I do have this set of amendments, all of which relate to the subject of the bill. The first is by Senator Campbell on behalf of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which strikes certain language in the bill on the subject of the use of highway trust funds. The second, of which I am a sponsor, also on behalf of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, is an amendment to the Tribal Self-Governance Act to require the repayment of misused Federal funds by self-governance tribes. The third one of mine is a minor boundary modification at the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. The fourth also is one of mine for the Fish and Wildlife Service which prohibits the use of funds for land acquisition at Texas Chenier Plain. The fifth, by Senator Hollings, to which the colloquy applies, makes amendments to the Coastal Barrier Resource System maps in South Carolina. The sixth, by the two Senators from Maryland, is a modification of section 135 of the fiscal year 1998 Interior appropriations bill on the subject of the Oxon Cove land exchange. The next is by Senator Stevens which clarifies section 121, re: ``hotshot'' crews--that is to say, forest firefighting crews--in Alaska. The next, also by Senator Stevens, provides for exchange of lands in Katmai National Park. And, the last by Senator Wyden of Oregon gives the Bureau of Land Management authority to enter into the watershed restoration and enhancement agreements to the same extent that the Forest Service can do so. With that, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendments be agreed to.

Mr. GORTON. Yes. I understand that this group, which is composed of a diverse array of impacted interests, recently received approval for the NW Oregon/SW Washington Canada Goose Agricultural Depredation Control Plan which provides a foundation for many depredation reduction programs. I am very impressed by the work of this group and am delighted that it will have sufficient flexibility to develop solutions to this problem. civil war battlefield preservation

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Madam 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. I further ask unanimous consent that at 10 a.m. Senator Bumpers be recognized in order to offer an amendment relating to mining, and that the time until 12:30 be equally divided in the usual form. I ask unanimous consent that at 2:15 there be 10 minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form with a vote occurring on or in relation to the Bumpers amendment at the hour of 2:25 on Tuesday, with no amendments in order to the Bumpers amendment prior to the vote.

Mr. GORTON. I further ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess from the hours of 12:30 to 2:15 for the weekly policy conferences to meet.

Mr. GORTON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, September 15. I further ask that when the Senate reconvenes on Tuesday immediately following the prayer, the Journal of proceedings be approved, no resolutions come over under the rule, the call of the calendar be waived, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved. I ask consent there then be a period of morning business until 10 a.m. with the time equally divided between the majority and minority leaders or their designees. I further ask unanimous consent that at 10 a.m. the Senate resume consideration of the Interior appropriations bill.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. For the information of all Senators, tomorrow the Senate will resume debate on the Interior appropriations bill. Senator Bumpers will offer an amendment relating to mining laws with the vote occurring on or in relation to that amendment at 2:25 tomorrow afternoon. Following that vote, it is hoped that Members who still intend to offer amendments to the Interior appropriations bill will work with the managers of the legislation to schedule consideration of their amendments. I thank my colleagues and remind all Members that the first vote will occur on Tuesday beginning at 2:25 in the afternoon.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. At 5 o'clock, under the previous order, we are to go back to another bill, on which we will vote on cloture on the motion to proceed at 5:30. It is the present intention of the majority leader to have a vote on tabling this amendment immediately after that 5:30 vote. I am sure that the majority leader will want to give the minority leader an opportunity to speak to the issue, however, beforehand. That is something they can negotiate with one another, but I see no problem in letting the minority leader speak.

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, we began debate on this Interior appropriations bill last Tuesday. The Senator from West Virginia, Mr. Byrd, and I each made our opening statements and a handful of agreed- upon amendments were added to the bill at that point. Then we spent much of the rest of the week on an amendment relating to campaign finance laws and other subjects not related to the Interior appropriations bill. So no progress was made on this bill. Today, a number of Members on the other side of the aisle wish to offer an amendment related to agricultural policy. Of course, under the rules of the Senate, they have every right to do so. It is certainly appropriate to recognize them in the absence of a contested amendment dealing with the Interior appropriations bill. The majority leader wants all Members to know that there will be time for discussion of that amendment during the course of the afternoon on both sides, including the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Agriculture. But when that debate seems to be over, or at 5 o'clock, whichever comes first, the Senator from Indiana, the chairman of the Appropriations Committee, will move to table the amendment and will ask for the yeas and nays, and there will be a vote on tabling the amendment immediately after the vote that is already scheduled for 5:30 this afternoon. With that notification, I yield the floor. Mr. HARKIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. GORTON. Objection.

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

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that there be a period for the transaction of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure today to introduce legislation which will correct a longstanding technical error to the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area Act of 1986. As those who were around this body over a decade ago remember, the Columbia Gorge Act was a highly complicated and contentious piece of legislation. A great number of impacted citizens made substantial sacrifices to see that this Act which was intended to protect one of the most pristine and magnificent natural resources anywhere in America could become law. Because of the detailed nature and the sometimes convoluted process established under this Act, it is not surprising that a mistake along the lines of what my bill today intends to correct could happen. My legislation simply makes a technical correction to the Gorge Act by excluding approximately 29 acres of land owned by the Port of Camas-Washougal. This area was inadvertently included within the southwestern boundary of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area 12 years ago. Mr. President, ever since the establishment of the National Scenic Area, the Port of Camas-Washougal has been diligent in its efforts to prove that a small portion of its property was unintentionally included in the Scenic Area. In fact, even before the Gorge Act became law, the Port was successful in getting legislation passed that established the Steigerwald Lake National Wildlife Refuge and reserved 80 acres of this area for its own purposes. Unfortunately, two years later, Congress in its infinite wisdom located the southwest boundary of the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area so that approximately 19 of the 80 reserved acres and 10 acres of Port-owned land were included in the National Scenic Area. The legislation I am offering today would exclude these 29 acres under question as Congress had originally intended. I touched earlier on the Port's diligence in seeing this process through to its completion. Whether it be working with the Washington State Congressional delegation, getting approval from the Columbia Gorge Commission, or convincing originally skeptical segments of the local community, the Port's efforts are proof positive that persistence pays off when it comes to resolving complicated and contentious problems. It also helps to have the facts on your side. And clearly that is what the Port has been demonstrating over the past 12 years. One concern that was raised in discussions with representatives of a number of interested parties throughout the local southwestern Washington community was the possibility that legislation making a technical boundary change might set a dangerous precedent in which other less deserving boundary change proposals are cavalierly enacted into law. Because of these concerns, I have included a provision in my bill stating in no uncertain terms that is not the intent of this legislation to set a precedent regarding adjustment or amendment of any boundaries of the National Scenic Area or any other provisions of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act. While the Gorge Act remains controversial within some sectors of my state and is by no means perfect, this legislation represents a special case where it has been clearly proven that the intent of Congress was not being carried out and the enabling statute needed correction. Any further proposals to change boundaries or revisions to the '86 Act will have to stand on their own merits and pass a similar test. In addition to the Port of Camas-Washougal, I also want to commend representatives of the Columbia Gorge Commission and the Friends of the Gorge for working together with the Port to develop a reasonable solution to this mistake. I also want to thank my two colleagues, Senator Murray and Congresswomen Smith, both of whom also have the pleasure of representing this beautiful area, for their support in this effort. While my legislation is not intended to set any legislative precedents, I do hope the positive process by which it was developed will foster further consensus building efforts throughout the local community.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, it gives me great pleasure today to introduce legislation which will correct a longstanding technical error to the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area Act of 1986. As those who were around this body over a decade ago remember, the Columbia Gorge Act was a highly complicated and contentious piece of legislation. A great number of impacted citizens made substantial sacrifices to see that this Act which was intended to protect one of the most pristine and magnificent natural resources anywhere in America could become law. Because of the detailed nature and the sometimes convoluted process established under this Act, it is not surprising that a mistake along the lines of what my bill today intends to correct could happen. My legislation simply makes a technical correction to the Gorge Act by excluding approximately 29 acres of land owned by the Port of Camas-Washougal. This area was inadvertently included within the southwestern boundary of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area 12 years ago. Mr. President, ever since the establishment of the National Scenic Area, the Port of Camas-Washougal has been diligent in its efforts to prove that a small portion of its property was unintentionally included in the Scenic Area. In fact, even before the Gorge Act became law, the Port was successful in getting legislation passed that established the Steigerwald Lake National Wildlife Refuge and reserved 80 acres of this area for its own purposes. Unfortunately, two years later, Congress in its infinite wisdom located the southwest boundary of the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area so that approximately 19 of the 80 reserved acres and 10 acres of Port-owned land were included in the National Scenic Area. The legislation I am offering today would exclude these 29 acres under question as Congress had originally intended. I touched earlier on the Port's diligence in seeing this process through to its completion. Whether it be working with the Washington State Congressional delegation, getting approval from the Columbia Gorge Commission, or convincing originally skeptical segments of the local community, the Port's efforts are proof positive that persistence pays off when it comes to resolving complicated and contentious problems. It also helps to have the facts on your side. And clearly that is what the Port has been demonstrating over the past 12 years. One concern that was raised in discussions with representatives of a number of interested parties throughout the local southwestern Washington community was the possibility that legislation making a technical boundary change might set a dangerous precedent in which other less deserving boundary change proposals are cavalierly enacted into law. Because of these concerns, I have included a provision in my bill stating in no uncertain terms that is not the intent of this legislation to set a precedent regarding adjustment or amendment of any boundaries of the National Scenic Area or any other provisions of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area Act. While the Gorge Act remains controversial within some sectors of my state and is by no means perfect, this legislation represents a special case where it has been clearly proven that the intent of Congress was not being carried out and the enabling statute needed correction. Any further proposals to change boundaries or revisions to the '86 Act will have to stand on their own merits and pass a similar test. In addition to the Port of Camas-Washougal, I also want to commend representatives of the Columbia Gorge Commission and the Friends of the Gorge for working together with the Port to develop a reasonable solution to this mistake. I also want to thank my two colleagues, Senator Murray and Congresswomen Smith, both of whom also have the pleasure of representing this beautiful area, for their support in this effort. While my legislation is not intended to set any legislative precedents, I do hope the positive process by which it was developed will foster further consensus building efforts throughout the local community.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, the distinguished President pro tempore has asked for 5 or 10 minutes to speak as in morning business. I ask unanimous consent that you recognize him for that purpose.

Mr. GORTON. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. He does, though in this case I am not sure that Buckley v. Valeo would have been so decided, even with respect to the limitation on contributions to individual candidates, had those limitations been, say, $380 or $390 today. That is to say, a restriction or a limitation that is constitutional under one set of circumstances could easily find itself to be unconstitutional under another set of circumstances, if the Court deemed those limitations to be unreasonably restrictive.

Mr. GORTON. The quarrel that the Senator from Wisconsin has is not with this Senator but the Supreme Court of the United States and the first amendment.

Mr. GORTON

Mr. GORTON. I now ask for the second reading of the second bill.

Mr. GORTON. I object to further consideration of the bill at this time.