Jesse Helms

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 99, S. 833; Calendar No. 126, S. 1000; and Calendar No. 127, S. 1043, en bloc, that the bills be considered read a third time and passed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and any statements relating to any of these bills be printed in the Record.

Mr. HELMS

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. HELMS

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I know I have delayed the recess of the Senate this afternoon. For that I apologize. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, partisan politics, I guess, is a game like football, baseball, or checkers, and that game has, no doubt, been played in the Senate for as long as there has been a Senate. In it, you win some, you lose some, and, as the saying goes, some are rained out. It has been suggested from time to time that maybe a time or two I have played a little bit of it myself, and I plead nolo contendere to the suggestion. But the game, it seems to me, that the distinguished minority leader, Mr. Daschle, has been playing of late has sometimes been marked by a rather interesting degree of misstatements of fact--unintentional, I'm sure--and curious conclusions. That, too, has not been unknown heretofore in the history of the Senate. And I do not suggest that the minority leader's misstatements or insinuations are deliberate, and I am willing to assume that his errors are accidental and unintentional. Just the same, my observations this afternoon are based on my incredulous reaction early this morning when I read an article in the Washington Post, page A21, under a headline reading ``Confirmation Process Frustrates President.'' That was, of course, Mr. Clinton, with whom Senator Daschle says he met this past Wednesday night. It indicates that Senator Daschle confided to the Washington Post's very competent reporter, Helen Dewar, that--and I quote from Ms. Dewar's story--``The President . . . expressed probably the highest level of exasperation I've heard him express on the subject, Daschle said, making clear that he (Senator Daschle) shares Clinton's frustration.'' Further, according to Ms. Dewar's report, ``[Senator] Daschle estimated that there are 30 ambassadorial nominations awaiting action for countries that, according to a Senate list, include Britain, France, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Bosnia, and, as of Tuesday, Mexico.'' Well, Mr. President, if Mr. Clinton and Mr. Daschle are suffering their ``highest levels of exasperation,'' and if the President uttered the ``choice words'' attributed to him by Senator Daschle regarding the work of the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee, then I suggest that both gentlemen dismount their high horses, examine the true facts, and correct their joint misstatements about the excellent work of the Foreign Relations Committee, which I have the honor of serving as chairman, with Senator Joe Biden as the ranking member. What the President is purported to have implied--and Mr. Daschle says he agrees with it--is nonsense, I say respectfully; it is nonsense regarding the work and cooperation of the staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, of which Adm. ``Bud'' Nance is the Chief of Staff. Bud Nance is among the top chiefs of staff ever to serve the Senate's committees, and I believe Mr. Clinton's State Department will join me in that assessment of the committee staff members, both majority and minority. Now, let's look at some specific things and respond to the President with what the actual facts are. First, Thomas Pickering left the position of Ambassador to Russia on November 1, 1996. The Foreign Relations Committee received the nomination of James Collins to succeed Tom Pickering 7 months later, on June 2, 1997. Let me just remind anybody who may be interested that Russia is selling sophisticated weaponry to terrorist states, such as Iran, and Russia barely maintains control of its 20,000 warhead nuclear arsenal. Now, by Mr. Clinton's own choice, the position of Ambassador to Russia went vacant for 7 months. We didn't get a piece of paper from the White House. When we did get the nomination, we expedited the hearing process for this nomination, and we are prepared to send it to the full Senate--that is, the nomination of James Collins --next week. Second, Charles Redman left the position of Ambassador to Germany on June 20, 1996, over a year ago. The Foreign Relations Committee received the nomination of John Kornblum for this position on May 22 of this year, 1997. Now, Mr. President, Germany is the most powerful country in Europe and is central to virtually every decision made by our European allies. By the White House's own choice, don't you see, the position of Ambassador to Germany was vacant for almost a full year. The committee scheduled a hearing after finally getting the papers on the nomination of Mr. Kornblum, and we are prepared to send the nomination to the Senate next week. Third, John Menzies left the position of Ambassador to Bosnia in December 1996. The Foreign Relations Committee received the nomination of Richard Kauzlarich on July 8, 1997, just a couple of weeks ago. Now, it was the White House's choice that the position of Ambassador to Bosnia was vacant for more than 8 months before we got a scrap of paper from the White House in the Foreign Relations Committee. Of course, thousands of American soldiers have been kept in Bosnia for 8 months, but for 8 months the White House has delayed sending the nomination of the successor, Mr. Kauzlarich. The committee, again, has scheduled a hearing to consider this nomination. We are prepared to send it to the Senate next week. Fourth, James Blanchard left the position of Ambassador to Canada in April 1996, over a year ago. The Foreign Relations Committee received the nomination of Gordon Griffin on June 26, 1997. The Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on July 15, after we had gotten all of the papers prepared, and reported his nomination to the full Senate on July 17, where it is pending on the Executive Calendar of the Senate. The United States is engaged in foreign policy and trade disputes with Canada, ranging from the Pacific Northwest to Cuba, and the position to Ambassador to Canada was vacant--not the responsibility of the Foreign Relations Committee, but of the White House--the White House--for more than a year. Fifth, the post of United States Ambassador to France has been vacant since the death of Ambassador Pamela Harriman. She died on February 5 of this year. And then, after that, there was a month-long public battle between several of President Clinton's political supporters and a career Foreign Service officer who wanted the post, and the President finally selected one of the substantial donors to the Democratic Party for this position. Now, that is not unusual. The point is that all this time elapsed. It was not the Foreign Relations Committee staff's fault. It was the White House's fault. Mr. Daschle is bound to have known that. Let me say that the French leaders have opposed the United States on almost every foreign policy decision regarding United States-European relations, but by President Clinton's choice, the position of Ambassador to France, nevertheless, was vacant for just about 6 months. The committee again has scheduled a hearing to consider the nomination next Tuesday, less than a week after the papers got up to us from the White House. So who is delaying all of these nominations, Mr. President? I think the facts speak for themselves. Then there is the nomination of Philip Lader. I believe it came on July 22, just a few days ago. The committee has immediately scheduled a hearing for Mr. Lader for next Tuesday, less than a week after receiving this nomination. Seventh, the President has yet to name ambassadors for Japan and South Korea. Now, these Embassies have been minus ambassadors since the end of last year, nearly 8 months--not the fault of the Foreign Relations Committee, not the fault of the Senate, not the fault of anybody in the Senate, but the White House. Let me reiterate and emphasize that there has been a high degree of cooperation between the State Department and the Senators who serve on the Foreign Relations Committee and, I might add, between the excellent staff of the committee and the State Department staff. I think that the cooperation between the various entities has been remarkable and unheard of for several years prior to this year and last year. In fact, we have done our best to work with and consult with the White House. Therefore, statements made by Senator Daschle are not acceptable. To the extent that the President has stated or has implied that any lag in the ambassadorial nomination process is the fault of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I have to say, no, sir; you are wrong. Some time back the White House publicly identified a possible--a possible--nomination about which I had and still have a problem. I have tried to be as candid and up front about my position regarding that nomination since long before the nomination was made. When? Just this past week. I feel that it will be useful to have the Congressional Record reflect the specific names, dates, and places involved in diplomatic nominations. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent, since I have discussed several specific nominations, the entire list be printed in the Record.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and that any statements relating to the resolution appear at this point in the Record.

Mr. HELMS. I thank the Chair. The concurrent resolution was agreed to.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Record remain open until 3 p.m. for introduction of bills and submission of statements.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, at the close of business yesterday, Thursday, July 24, 1997, the Federal debt stood at $5,368,881,340,728.99. (Five trillion, three hundred sixty-eight billion, eight hundred eighty-one million, three hundred forty thousand, seven hundred twenty-eight dollars and ninety-nine cents) One year ago, July 24, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,173,226,000,000. (Five trillion, one hundred seventy-three billion, two hundred twenty-six million) Five years ago, July 24, 1992, the Federal debt stood at $3,989,786,000,000. (Three trillion, nine hundred eighty-nine billion, seven hundred eighty-six million) Ten years ago, July 24, 1987, the Federal debt stood at $2,300,013,000,000. (Two trillion, three hundred billion, thirteen million) Twenty-five years ago, July 24, 1972, the Federal debt stood at $434,436,000,000 (Four hundred thirty-four billion, four hundred thirty-six million) which reflects a debt increase of nearly $5 trillion--$4,934,445,340,728.99 (Four trillion, nine hundred thirty- four billion, four hundred forty-five million, three hundred forty thousand, seven hundred twenty-eight dollars and ninety-nine cents) during the past 25 years.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I further ask that at 3 p.m. on Monday, there be 1 hour for morning business under the control of Senator Daschle or his designee, and at 4 p.m. there be 1 hour for morning business under the control of Senator Coverdell.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until the hour of 12 noon on Monday, July 28. I further ask that on Monday, immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted. It will be the majority leader's intention to then proceed to the consideration of S. 830 regarding the FDA reform.

Mr. HELMS

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

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. For the information of all Members, on Monday it will be the leader's intention to begin consideration of S. 830, the FDA reform bill. Following debate on that issue, there will be a period for morning business, to be followed by the Transportation appropriations bill beginning at 5 p.m. By a previous consent, any votes ordered with respect to the Transportation bill will be postponed to occur at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday. Therefore, no votes will occur in Monday's session of the Senate. However, it is the hope of the majority leader that the Senate could complete debate on the Transportation appropriations bill on Monday. And, in addition, as announced by the majority leader, the next votes will be a series of votes occurring on Tuesday at 9:30 a.m. on the Commerce, Justice, State Department appropriations bill.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, at the close of business yesterday, Wednesday, July 23, 1997, the Federal debt stood at $5,367,622,941,689.53. (Five trillion, three hundred sixty-seven billion, six hundred twenty-two million, nine hundred forty-one thousand, six hundred eighty-nine dollars and fifty-three cents.) One year ago, July 23, 1996, the Federal debt stood at $5,171,664,000,000. (Five trillion, one hundred seventy-one billion, six hundred sixty-four million.) Five years ago, July 23, 1992, the Federal debt stood at $3,988,415,000,000. (Three trillion, nine hundred eighty-eight billion, four hundred fifteen million.) Ten years ago, July 23, 1987, the Federal debt stood at $2,300,098,000,000. (Two trillion, three hundred billion, ninety-eight million.) Fifteen years ago, July 23, 1982, the Federal debt stood at $1,086,341,000,000 (One trillion, eighty-six billion, three hundred forty-one million) which reflects a debt increase of more than $4 trillion--$4,281,281,941,689.53 (Four trillion, two hundred eighty-one billion, two hundred eighty-one million, nine hundred forty-one thousand, six hundred eighty-nine dollars and fifty-three cents) during the past 15 years.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, at the close of business yesterday, Tuesday, July 22, 1997, the federal debt stood at $5,366,067,378,744.76. (Five trillion, three hundred sixty-six billion, sixty-seven million, three hundred seventy-eight thousand, seven hundred forty-four dollars and seventy-six cents) One year ago, July 22, 1996, the federal debt stood at $5,169,929,000,000. (Five trillion, one hundred sixty-nine billion, nine hundred twenty-nine million) Five years ago, July 22, 1992, the federal debt stood at $3,984,029,000,000. (Three trillion, nine hundred eighty-four billion, twenty-nine million) Ten years ago, July 22, 1987, the federal debt stood at $2,314,592,000,000. (Two trillion, three hundred fourteen billion, five hundred ninety-two million) Fifteen years ago, July 22, 1982, the federal debt stood at $1,085,930,000,000 (One trillion, eighty-five billion, nine hundred thirty million) which reflects a debt increase of more than $4 trillion--$4,280,137,378,744.76 (Four trillion, two hundred eighty billion, one hundred thirty-seven million, three hundred seventy-eight thousand, seven hundred forty-four dollars and seventy-six cents) during the past 15 years.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote. Mr. HARKIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. HELMS

Mr. HELMS. Yes, the perfecting amendment, as modified.

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, let me be sure I understand the Senator. The first vote would be on the perfecting amendment, is that it?

Mr. HELMS. I have no objection to that.

Mr. HELMS. I object to the same thing, but I tried to hasten it a little bit. I ask for the yeas and nays on the second-degree amendment.

Mr. HELMS. The second-degree amendment, as modified, of course.

Mr. HELMS. Very well.

Mr. HELMS. As modified.

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

Mr. HELMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the following, and I believe it has been agreed to on the other side. One, that the yeas and nays be deemed to have been ordered on the second-degree amendment, the perfecting amendment; two, that the yeas and nays will be deemed to have been ordered on the underlying amendment; and then, at the appropriate time, that the vote to proceed, first on the second-degree perfecting amendment, and, if that fails, then there be an up-or-down vote on the underlying amendment--meaning that there will be rollcall votes, up or down, on both amendments. Amendment No. 969, As Modified First of all, I send to the desk a modification, before this is acted on.