Fritz Hollings

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk and I ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. HOLLINGS. If there is no objection, to the bill itself.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me take this opportunity to congratulate Prof. Richard Uray of the University of South Carolina College of Journalism and Mass Communication for being inducted last week into the South Carolina Broadcasting Association's Hall of Fame. Rick's public induction signals what we've all known for a long time--that he is one of the most dedicated broadcasting professionals that South Carolina has ever had. We have known privately for years that he ranks up there [[Page S 9936]] with the likes of John Rivers, Walter Brown, Henry Cauthen, Betty Roper, Joe Wilder, Bill Saunders, and Dick Laughridge, among others. Now, everyone in the State will know. Rick Uray has been teaching and influencing the lives of broadcasters for more than 40 years. After receiving degrees from Kent State University and the University of Houston, he came to South Carolina during the year in which I was first elected to the Senate. That year, 1966, he became the chairman of the broadcasting sequence at the USC College of Journalism and began teaching the art of broadcasting to hundreds of South Carolina's best students. Also in 1966, Rick started a 30-year link with the South Carolina Broadcasting Association when he became the organization's executive manager. Mr. President, as the leader of the SCBA, Rick Uray has been a testament to true professionalism. His calm dedication and energy made him a model for two generations of broadcasters. And while he'll retire from the university and SCBA at the end of the year, he'll leave a legacy that any college freshman should be proud to emulate. Mr. President, I appreciate this opportunity to recognize the warmth, energy and lifelong commitment of Dr. Richard Uray. He is a true friend to South Carolina's broadcasting community. Let us wish him a happy retirement and many more years to come.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I rise today to draw attention to a little green and red sticker on my lapel. It says, ``I love watermelon.'' And Mr. President, I sure do. Thanks to the hard work of South Carolina watermelon farmers like Jim Williams of Lodge in Colleton County, Senators and their aides tomorrow will be able to taste the sweet, juicy, red meat of the melon that we call smile fruit. All day Tuesday, my staff will deliver more than 500 watermelons to offices throughout the Senate. This year, farmers in South Carolina planted more than 11,000 acres of watermelons. We produce all kinds of watermelons--Jubilees, Sangrias, Allsweets, Star Brites, Crimson Sweets, red seedless, yellow seedless, and a variety of other hybrids marketed in the Eastern United States. Through the end of this month, farmers in Allendale, Bamberg, Barnwell, Colleton, Hampton, and other southern South Carolina counties will harvest hundreds of thousands of watermelons. In the Pee Dee areas around Chesterfield, Darlington, and Florence Counties, the harvest will continue until about August 20. Mr. President, the bottom line is that all of these farmers will be laboring in the heat and humidity to bring Americans what we call Mother Nature's perfect candy. Our remarkable watermelons are sweet, succulent, and, most importantly, nutritious and fatfree. However, while many of us savor the taste of juicy pink watermelons at the beach, at barbecues, and at family reunions, we often forget the work and labor that goes into producing such a delicious fruit. In fact, if you ask many children these days where watermelons come from, they will answer ``the grocery store.'' The truth is, Mr. President, that our farmers are among the most often forgotten workers in our country. Without their dedication and commitment, our Nation would not enjoy such a wonderful selection of fresh fruit, vegetables, and other foods. South Carolina farmers lead the way in the production of watermelons. For example, my State was a leader in the development of black plastic and irrigation to expand the watermelon growing season. By covering the earth in the spring with black plastic, farmers are able to speed up the melons' growth by raising soil temperatures. In addition, the plastic allows farmers to shut out much of the visible light, which inhibits weed growth. In addition, I am pleased to note that the scientists at the USDA vegetable laboratory in my hometown of Charleston continue to strive to find more efficient and effective ways to produce one of our State's most popular fruits. Therefore, as my fellow Members and their staffs feast on watermelons tomorrow, I hope they all will remember the folks in South Carolina who made this endeavor possible: Jim Williams of Williams Farms in Lodge; Les Tindal, our State agriculture commissioner; Wilton Cook of the Clemson University Extension Service in Charleston; Minta Wade of the South Carolina Department of Agriculture; and members of the South Carolina Watermelon Association and South Carolina Watermelon Board in Columbia. They all have worked extremely hard to ensure that Senators can get a taste of South Carolina. I trust that all Senators and their staffers will savor tomorrow one of the finest examples of the excellent produce we grow in our State. I also hope to see many folks wearing their ``I love watermelon'' stickers in celebration of the fruit that makes everyone smile--South Carolina watermelons.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Go right ahead on the opening statements.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I thank also the distinguished colleague from Delaware. I will be brief.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, what really happens is that there is a total disconnect in the American people. Over the years, we have led the American public to really believe that all we need to do is eliminate foreign aid, cut welfare, get rid of public broadcasting and a few of the subsidies for the farmers--and that if we can get rid of those things, we will have a balanced budget. Not at all. No chance whatever. The bigness of Government that we all complain about, and we all say Government is too big, is the interest cost on the national debt. The interest cost on the national debt jumps this year for a total amount of $340 billion. When we balanced that budget, as I referred to, under President Johnson, the interest cost on the entire debt for 200 years of history--the revolutionary world, World War I, World War II, Korea, all the wars--the interest on the national debt was only $4 billion. Today, this fiscal year, it is estimated at $340 billion. We are like Alice in Wonderland, to stay where you are, you have got to run as fast as you can; to get ahead, you have to run faster. We need freezes, yes; the cuts, yes; the loophole closings, yes; and yes, the taxes. We do not tell the American people the truth, and that is the source of the disconnect. What we have is this particular budget that has no idea, really, of achieving balance. The scheme adopted by our friends in the House is to appear traumatic and race around and say, ``Get rid of Energy, Education, Housing, the Department of Commerce, do it all, those friends over in the Senate will save us. They will not get rid of all these departments. While we have their attention up here, down here we will give them a tax cut. We will get the White House next year, and get credit for a balanced budget plan. Then we can say that the reason it did not work is those tax and spend liberals who held it up.'' Now, that is the fraud being perpetrated. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the Washington Post editorial lauding this budget as an enormous service, and my response.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, Mark Twain stated many years ago that, ``The truth is such a precious thing, it should be used very sparingly.'' Therein, of course, is the approach that we use in our budgetary and fiscal concerns here and problems and responsibilities in the U.S. Government. I want to talk of the fraud that this particular budget, which we will vote upon, is exacting upon the American people. It is very striking and ironic that we have spent the past week talking about fraud on the investors, defrauding the taxpayers, and everything else. But the greatest fraud to be perpetrated is going to occur right here on the floor of the U.S. Senate later today. It is, once again, the so- called ``balanced budget plan.'' We have been lying about that balanced budget plan for some 15 years. In that context, I think of my friend Vaclav Havel of Czechoslovakia. The late Senator from Washington, Senator Jackson, and myself had a unique opportunity. We were told in Prague, ``When you go out and see this dissident, you will be trailed.'' We went out in the residential area, and we sat down in a bedroom and waited to make sure that we were not followed. After about a half-hour, they said all was clear. Out of the closet door in the bedroom came Vaclav Havel. He had been in there for the last half-hour while we were waiting. Trying to impress Mr. Havel with respect to the United States' commitments to getting these dissidents out, Senator Jackson mentioned Jackson-Vanik. Mr. Havel said, ``Jackson-Vanik?'' Jackson said, ``Yes, that is where we bring economic pressure so that we can get you out of Czechoslovakia.'' I will never forget Havel. He said, ``Mr. Senator, Czechoslovakia was raped in 1938, in 1958 and in 1968.'' He said, ``If I and my generation do not see it through here and stay in Czechoslovakia, the world will never know Czechoslovakia as we have known it.'' He said, ``We have no idea of leaving. We are not interested in Jackson-Vanik.'' On the way to the airport, I broke the silence and said, ``Scoop, that fellow is very courageous, but he is not going to see a free Czechoslovakia, and we are not going to see it in our lifetime.'' But of course, Czechoslovakia is now free. I was very interested in Havel's remarks after taking over as the President of Czechoslovakia. He said: For 40 years, we have been lied to. For 40 years, we have grown sicker, saying one thing and believing another. I assume you did not elect me to continue this 40 years of lying. We have to deal with our problems, and no one else can solve them but us. In a parallel situation, Mr. President, that is exactly the way this Senator rises--as a member of the Budget Committee since its institution, as former chairman of that Budget Committee, as a Senator who voted for a balanced budget under Lyndon Johnson, and who, as chairman of that Budget Committee, reduced the deficit back in 1981 under President Carter with the first reconciliation bill, as a Senator who worked with the then majority leader, Howard Baker of Tennessee, on a freeze that we could not enact, and as a Senator who worked on a bipartisan fashion again with Senators Gramm and Rudman on not only a freeze but cuts in Government spending, then, as the Senator who appeared 5 years ago before the Finance Committee saying, [[Page S 9359]] ``Of course we need the freeze, the cuts, and the taxes,'' recommending a value-added tax. I have been in the vineyards for quite a while and hate to see this fraud perpetrated. The fraud and the lie, Mr. President, is that they have no idea of balancing the budget. Turn to page 3 of the conference report, and you will see under the word ``Deficits,'' for the year 2002: $108.4 billion. There is no presumption that the budget is going to be balanced. Let me point out now by turning to page 4, the true deficit. Page 3 shows the amounts that we will owe Social Security, but the figures on page 4 include borrowed monies from the other trust funds that must be repaid. We all know about building airports, building highways; all of the other trust funds are used to obscure the size of the deficit in this fraud. We all participate in it. There on page 4 where it says ``debt increase,'' we find in fiscal year 2002, the debt will increase by $185.1 billion. After all the eliminations of the Department of Commerce and other departments, getting rid of public broadcasting--whatever--that is where we end up 7 years from now if we use the most favorable assumptions. But when those assumptions do not come about, like a house of cards, if one falls, the whole thing will come apart. That is what will happen. I will make the bet. Give me the odds and give me the amount. I bet we will borrow over $185.1 billion. I have made this point ad nauseam since January when we started on this task with a new Congress. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record, the realities on truth in budgeting.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Then why is the budget not real, Mr. President? Simply speaking, it calls for $499 billion in cuts. All along Republicans have been carping that it was entitlements that were the problem. But now to finance a tax cuts, massive reductions must be required in programs like biomedical research and education that will never occur. Mr. President, I tried for half the level of discretionary cuts back during Gramm-Rudman-Hollings. But when we got to the short rolls in 1990, we bugged out and repealed the fixed deficit targets of Gramm- Rudman-Hollings. I raised the point of order at 12:40, on October 19, 12:41 a.m, and Senator Gramm and Senator Rudman voted to repeal it. This Senator did not. I raised a point of order. If we could not do it then, how are we going to do it now? The next thing, of course, Mr. President, is the $270 billion in Medicare. The President tried his first year and we finally compromised without a single Republican vote, cutting $57 billion. That is what we had the compromise down to. Last year the President proposed another $120 billion as part of comprehensive health care reform, and they rebuffed him, ridiculed his wife, and said, ``No way.'' Now they come with a totally unrealistic figure of $270 billion, and because they do not want to endorse any specific cuts, they give it to a commission. What a copout. Talk about ``Where's Bill,'' and all these signs on the floor--where is the Congress' responsibility? Give it to a commission--come on. Then they cannot find $182 billion in specific cuts for Medicaid. That is not going to happen. So they give that to the States. Also, $100 billion in welfare cuts. They do not want to do it, give that to the States. Then they come around with the greatest gimmick of all, what they call the interest or fiscal dividend--the interest bonus of $170 billion. Now, Mr. President, we tried that in 1990. I am going to insert in the Record the exact figure. Here it is: The fiscal year 1991 budget, 5 years ago. Under that plan, the deficit in 1991 was supposed to go down to $64 billion, and in 1992 down to $8.9 billion; 1993, we were to have a surplus of $44.8 billion; 1994, $108.5 billion; 1995, this fiscal year, Mr. President, imagine that--here we have a document that said this year we are going to have a surplus of $156.2 billion. We got that using the fiscal dividend. We had all these bonuses--how the interest costs were going down and everything else, so we have been through this 5 years ago. If you read Time magazine, the cover says, ``First Balanced Budget Presented in Decades.'' False, we presented a surplus just 5 years ago. Look at these plans. Sober up. Tell the truth to the American people. No chance of that welfare cut, that Medicare cut, that Medicaid cut, and the program cuts. Other Members know it and I know it. So the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee comes over on the Senate side and says, ``No, no, no, wait a minute. We want the cuts before we get the tax cut.'' See, the $170 billion is used for a tax cut. I want everyone to turn to page 89, going quickly. ``The conferees agree that the $245 billion net tax cut represents an appropriate balance between accommodating the tax cuts in the House-passed Contract With America and the need to put the deficit on a declining path to a balanced budget in the year 2002.'' What balanced budget? Turn to page 4; it says a $185 billion deficit. But here on page 89, now, the Senate has yielded to the House and they have in here--all you have to do is give your assumptions to CBO and the CBO says yes, with those assumptions that will happen. And with that assumption verified just by giving it to them--not the actual cuts, not the actual votes for it--then you give it to the Finance Committee and they authorize for a $245 billion tax cut. And therein, again, is the conspiracy, the conniving conspiracy going into that conference, where they did not invite this Senator, I can tell you. We had opening statements when we had the communications bill. When they finally agreed, they came to my staff and said, ``Does Senator Hollings want to sign the conference report?" He said, ``He hasn't even been to a meeting. You would not even let us come to a meeting. But he could maybe sign it. Let us look at it and see it.'' He said, ``No, we cannot give you the details. You either sign it or do not sign it.'' So we did not sign it. Because they knew good and well I can read, and I have been reading them for 20-some years now. This is an absolute fraud on the American public. What you have now is a tax cut. You are going to have bigger deficits. You are going to have the interest costs going from $300 billion at least, to $500 billion by the year 2002. And we have the same act, the same scene. In conclusion, let me just read, so we get a historical perspective here, and the historical perspective is what was stated by our friend, David Stockman, who handled all of these budgets in years past. Stockman said 5 years ago: The root problem goes back to the July 1981 frenzy of excessive and imprudent tax cutting that shattered the Nation's fiscal stability, a noisy faction of Republicans that willfully denied this giant mistake of fiscal governance and their own culpability in it ever since. Instead, they have incessantly poisoned the political debate with a mindless stream of antitax venom, while pretending that economic growth and spending cuts alone could cure the deficit. It ought to be obvious by now that we cannot grow our way out. There it is, Mr. President. They do not give this to CBO. They do not give it to the Democratic colleagues. They do not have it scored. They just come in here with a quick, ``We got 5 hours more left. Let's just vote it up or down and, whoopee, we will go home for the Fourth of July; we have a balanced budget.'' We are lying to the American people and it should stop.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President I ask unanimous consent to have a list of the gross Federal debt, the real deficit and the gross interest costs printed in the Record.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Is the pending business regulatory reform?

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me take this opportunity to send birthday greetings to Faye Olasov, a friend from my hometown of Charleston, SC. Faye, a long-time activist in Charleston's Jewish community who turned 70 earlier this month, soon will be honored for all her work to make Charleston a better place to live. Mr. President, quite frankly, Faye is a whirlwind of wonder and joy. When people throughout the Charleston Jewish community think of a person who embodies family and wholesome values, Faye is the first person whose name comes to mind. She is the engine that has driven the Jewish Community Center in Charleston. At various times, she has served as day camp counselor, activities director, CenterTALK editor, Sherman House manager, and a newspaper columnist. Last December when she retired from the center, she left shoes that are hard to fill. Faye Rabinowitz Olasov was born June 13, 1925, in Charleston. When the Nation was at war in the 1940s, she attended the College of Charleston, where she was business manager and editor of the yearbook and president of the Dramatic Society. After a distinguished college career, she graduated in 1946. On top of all her work in Charleston's active Jewish community, Faye and husband Sanford Olasov had four children--Nathan, Billy, Barbara, and Judy, who my wife Peatsy taught at St. Andrews High School. Mr. President, now the communsity is coming together to give back something to Faye, who has given so much over the years. On July 9 at the Charleston Jewish Community Center, the community will honor Faye at a brunch that highlights her achievements and looks back at a life filled with compassion and great memories. Mr. President, if I may be so bold, we should all take a look at Faye's life and use it as the model of how to be involved in a community. I appreciate this opportunity to recognize the warmth, energy, and lifelong commitment of Faye Olasov--a true community leader. Let us all wish Faye a [[Page S 8834]] happy retirement and many more years to come.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Yes.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I understand so. The distinguished chairman is absolutely correct. And I think his letters have been made a part of the Record showing that he had nothing to do with it. The inference is not by the Senator from South Carolina that the Senator from South Dakota was in any way engaged in this kind of shenanigan. I can tell you here and now the Senate is going to operate not only with the correction but with the appearance of correct conduct here. I just did not want this to pass. I would have hoped that this amendment would have not been pursued on the basis of its merits, and I hope it will be defeated on the basis of the process so that everyone knows you cannot deal this way and get your amendments passed. I just think this reflects on the Senate. I agree with the Senator from Nebraska. And since my name is on the Weinstein letter and the first I have seen it is here this morning, I wanted to make that record absolutely clear. I hope we kill the amendment.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I will be glad to yield for a question.

Mr. HOLLINGS. No. If you are asking this Senator a question, I can tell you my judgment. If this change on the amendment is adopted, then the rates are bound to go up. The bill provides very properly that small and rural cable television operators get the volume discount. Now, what they want to say is, no, that is going to be stricken, and they are not going to get these volume discounts. Obviously, the price is going up on these small entities, and that is going to destroy the universal service theme of our particular S. 652.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me thank our distinguished colleague from Washington for his overgenerous remarks, although undeserved they are greatly appreciated. I join the Senator from New Mexico and join in the sentiments of both the Senators from New Mexico and Washington, that our distinguished chairman has done an outstanding job here in handling this bill. It has been totally in a cooperative fashion and in a very, very considerate fashion of everyone's amendments. When you begin to appreciate that, I think, a 1-cent increase in a 1- minute telephone rate nationwide equals $2 billion, then you begin to see why that other room stays filled up. They are not going to leave until we get through the conference. So we just started that journey of 1,000 miles with the first step. I hope we can continue with the success we have had thus far. I will even elaborate further when we get more time, because other Senators want to speak, but Senator Pressler has done an amazingly outstanding job.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me also join in my thanks to the distinguished Senator from Mississippi. When we really got into trouble, I went to the Senator from Mississippi. He paved the way all the time in the 2 years previous here working on this bill and, of course, all this year. I cannot thank him enough. We could not have had this bill without his leadership. Mr. DORGAN addressed the Chair.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me also join in my gratitude for Senator Hutchison's leadership. We all on the committee worked very closely. A moment ago my distinguished colleague from Arkansas gave me the theme that comes to mind. He concluded his observation that he was prepared to vote against the bill; that it would be a colossal mistake to pass this bill. Let me say in a word it would be a colossal mistake not to pass this bill. I came to the Senate almost 29 years ago, and they were talking then. And I immediately got on the Communications Subcommittee, and I can see Senator John Pastore, the chairman, talking about revising the 1934 Communications Act. I worked very closely with Senator Goldwater when he was the chairman, and I have been the chairman of the subcommittee and the full committee, and we worked time and time again and we were prepared, as everyone now knows--the distinguished Senator from South Dakota, now our chairman, was working with us--in the last closing moments to pass the bill last year. It would be a colossal mistake not to pass this bill. This bill is an excellent bill. It did not do all things, but the [[Page S8458]] truth of the matter is the experience has been, with the breakup of AT&T, that what we have now is 500 competitors in the long distance market. And with this bill by breaking up the regional Bell operating companies--this is how you legislatively, not by court order, but legislatively break up the monopolies of the local exchange--we are going to bring in hundreds and thousands of competitors. We are doing this in the most deliberate, measured fashion possible in that we appreciate that we in America have the best communications system in the entire world. We are not repairing the communications system in that light. What we are trying to do is remove the obstruction in the middle of the information superhighway, namely, the Government. With all the plethora of rules, hearings, injunctions and precedents, we are finding now that the judicial branch is totally overwhelmed; it could not possibly deal with the explosion of this technology. No one individual could. On the other hand, we are going to get communications policy back into the policymaking body of our Government, namely, the Congress and its administrator, the Federal Communications Commission. We have an outstanding bill. Senator Pressler has done an outstanding job. I am ready, as I understand, to prepare to vote on the Dole amendment, the Breaux amendment, which will be agreed to, and then final passage. As I stand here, I have been moved, as all Senators do, from the subject of the week--almost like Sealtest Ice Cream; we have the flavor of the week--we move to the other particular issue at hand. But staff on the other side of the aisle has been duly recognized, and I would again recognize Kevin Curtin and John Windhausen and Kevin Joseph, as well as Jim Drewry, Sylvia Cikins and Pierre Golpira, on our staff. They have worked not just during the 5 days of the week but weekends and evenings, around the clock, on and on again to keep us on a deliberate, measured, fair course of entering into competition and maintaining at the same time the wonderful universal service that we have. There is a tremendous balancing act that is involved here, and no one should run a touchdown in the wrong direction with the idea that, yes, we could have gotten in more competition or more protection for the consumers. We have gotten in the basic competition and the basic protections that were necessary and even more. So with that said, I hope we can move to the vote on the Dole amendment, Mr. President.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. I, too, understand these concerns and look forward to addressing them.

Mr. HOLLINGS. The Senator from South Dakota is correct.

Mr. HOLLINGS. The Senator's understanding is correct.

Mr. HOLLINGS. The Senator accurately states the intent of the bill as amended by the managers' amendment.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I concur in the comments of the Senator from Alaska [Mr. Murkowski] and the comments of the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Pressler. submitted amendment no. 1320

Mr. HOLLINGS. I agree with the Senator.