Fritz Hollings

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. I thank the Senator for yielding and support his suggestion that the FCC investigate technologies that may cause problems for significant segments of our population before they are introduced into the U.S. market. Such review is prudent for consumers, and it will help all companies by answering questions of safety interference before money is spent deploying this technology here in the United States. Four million Americans wear hearing aids, and the Senator from South Dakota has raised an important issue. GSM has been introduced in other countries, and problems have been reported. It is reasonable that these problems be investigated before the growth of this technology effectively shuts out a large sector of our population.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, No. 1300 has been cleared on this side.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, what we are trying to do is see that amendment in the second degree. We do not have that.

Mr. HOLLINGS. The amendments have been cleared on this side.

Mr. HOLLINGS

Mr. HOLLINGS. And I ask unanimous consent now that the amendment be set aside.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Madam President, on behalf of the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. Breaux], he wanted to make sure he qualified amendment No. 1299 to be called up but not necessarily to be voted on at this particular time. He is not present, but I would like to call it up and then set it aside, 1299.

Mr. HOLLINGS. I thank the distinguished Chair. Amendment No. 1299

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 Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Let me join in the comments with our distinguished chairman. What happens here is, with the amendment of the Senator from North Dakota, as this Senator sees it, it just comes back around and reiterates the amendment which was defeated. I do not think it was unjustifiably defeated or casually defeated, or whatever was the expression used by my friend from North Dakota. Yes, we should have oversight hearings. This is a really complex measure. I cannot see, as a member of that communications subcommittee, that we not have hearings each year to see the progress made, how they have managed to set down the rules for the unbundling, the dial parity, the interconnection, the number portability, and all of these particular things to move everything along down this information superhighway. So I agree with the Senator from North Dakota on that. But I agree with our chairman. We do not want to come back around now, and have it all settled--one-stop shopping, so to speak, that the FCC comes back around here at the last minute saying: By the way, we want to put the Attorney General back in there again. I am back in, if you want to hear those arguments again about antitrust lawyers.

Mr. HOLLINGS. What is the last wording there? I am trying to hear.

Mr. HOLLINGS. It has been cleared.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, let me see a copy of it. I have not seen the modification. We had made suggestions as to the modification. Can we look at it?

Mr. HOLLINGS. On behalf of Senator Moseley-Braun, I ask unanimous consent amendment 1282 be further modified as indicated in the modification that I send to the desk.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, while it appears we do not have an immediate amendment, we are reconciling differences, including one on universal services and otherwise. While we are engaged in that negotiation, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. HOLLINGS. I mean noncompetitive.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, looking at this amendment with respect to the phrasing in the purpose whereby in pricing flexibility and responding to competition by repricing services the intent as I understand it is that you not raise the noncompetitive services. When you say shifting revenues or raising costs, then you get into the concern about cost-based operations whereby I think the intent here is when you say shifting revenues--that is what is disturbing to this Senator. Is it the case that what the Senator is trying to say is that as you respond to that pricing flexibility, and you are responding to the repricing services competition that you do not raise competitive rates?

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, in the interests of all parties, as I understand it, should we have a motion and a rollcall ordered, I hope these rollcalls could be stacked beginning at 2 o'clock. We have a meeting of the leadership at the White House. We have Members down, bipartisanly, at a luncheon for the President of France, President Chirac. With that in mind, we can facilitate and move right along with any particular votes. I hope we can start at 2 o'clock, if the chairman gives us permission to do so. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Nebraska, as I understand the idea here it is to add a consumer representative to the joint board, which is now comprised of four State commissioners and three Federal commissioners. They have the general overall concern of consumers as well as industry. What you have suggested now, by the amendment, is that a consumer representative be added on. The industry friends, then, will say ``We want an industry friend.'' If there is one thing that sort the rankles this particular Senator--and it is not the Senator from Nebraska; Heavens above, I have the greatest admiration for him--but it is this idea of classifications around this town: middle class and lower class and upper class and rich class and poor. I represent the high, the low, the rich, the poor and all classes. I really look upon our public utility commission at the several States to be very much attuned to the interests of consumers as well as the industry, and similarly with respect to the FCC Members. Mr. Coelho and the Federal Communications Commission were just commended by the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals here in the District of Columbia last week for the outstanding job in measuring competition in the market and how they balance the interests of consumers versus the needs of the industry and otherwise. So I really am not enthused about this amendment but I yield to my distinguished chairman.

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

Mr. HOLLINGS. Is that correct, Senator?

Mr. HOLLINGS. The Senator from South Dakota was accepting the amendment once the modification had been withdrawn.

Mr. HOLLINGS. This could make the head of a corporation at least far more careful. Perhaps it could be allocated against him individually. I hearken back, in the past, when I was talking with the former distinguished Attorney General of the United States, Robert Kennedy, and we had the Mississippi case down at Oxford. He was asking me about the enforcement of these decisions of the Court. I met Senator Kennedy long before being Senators, otherwise we were very close. I said, ``You know our distinguished friend Governor Barnett has a building right across the street from the capital. If you had a $10,000 a day civil fine imposed, I think you would get his attention.'' We public officials act and the public will have to pick up, but when we are individually responsible, that is a different thing. I am confident that the Attorney General Kennedy communicated that with Governor Barnett, and thus the admission of James Meredith to Oxford. The idea is a good idea. It is one I used some years back. I do not see any objection to it. I will have to listen to our distinguished chairman.