Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, reserving the right to object to the unanimous consent request, I believe that Senator Collins had offered an amendment and that she would be scheduled to be recognized first.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, very briefly, I rise in support of this amendment. I think the misuse of the hold in the Senate has become a fundamental problem. I do not see how anybody could support the concept of secret holds. Now, this may drive holds into some other category, but I think it is a step in the right direction. I commend Senator Wyden and Senator Grassley for offering it. This proposal is an experiment in making the Senate and Senators more accountable to their colleagues and to the American people. This proposal addresses the issue of anonymous holds that Senators use to prevent consideration of legislation and nominations. This amendment would place a greater responsibility on Senators to make their holds public. It requires that the majority and minority leaders can only recognize a hold that is provided in writing. Moreover, for the hold to be honored, the Senator objecting would have to publish his objection in the Congressional Record, 3 days after the notice is provided to a leader. I believe that holds, whether anonymous or publicly announced, are an affront to the Senate, the leadership, the committees, and to the individual Members of this institution. This amendment does not eliminate the right of a Senator to place a hold. Some day, the Senate may decide that holds, in and of themselves, are an undemocratic practice that should no longer be recognized. Secret holds have no place in a publicly accountable institution. A measure that is important to a majority of the American public and a majority of Senators should not be stopped dead in it's tracks by a single Senator. And when that Senator can hide behind the anonymous hold, democracy itself is damaged. How do you tell your constituents that legislation they have an interest in, legislation that has been approved by the majority of a committee, is stalled and you don't know who is holding it up? What does that say about this institution? I think the secret hold should have no place in this institution, and I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LOTT. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate remain in a period of morning business until 5:15 this afternoon, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, on Wednesday, March 15, 2006, I joined Senator Snowe and Senator Baucus in introducing S. 2418, a bill to preserve local radio broadcast emergency and other services and to require the Federal Communications Commission to conduct a rulemaking for that purpose. Growing up in my home town of Pascagoula, MS, I had my own radio show. Through local radio, I had the opportunity to have a voice in my community. Local radio keeps communities informed about what is going on in their back yards, and gives local leaders an opportunity to communicate with their supporters. Over the years, I have been actively voicing my concerns on the issue of media ownership. I believe that the problem of the pervasiveness of indecency in broadcasting is related to my concerns about media ownership. When media conglomerates become too large, they are less responsive to the concerns of the American viewing public and less accountable to local communities. Media companies which use publicly owned airwaves must become more responsive to public needs, respectful of local values and reflective of community standards which seem to be constantly ignored by executives in east and west coast high-rise office buildings. In order to ensure that radio remains an independent source of information for local communities, I am pleased to introduce a bill to preserve local radio broadcast emergency and other services and to require the Federal Communications Commission to conduct a rulemaking for that purpose.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Monday, March 27, 2006, at 10 a.m. in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 226. Agenda I. Nominations: Norman Randy Smith, to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit; Patrick J. Schiltz, to be U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Minnesota; Steven G. Bradbury, to be an Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel. II. Bills: S. __, Comprehensive Immigration Reform; Chairman's Mark; S. 1768, A bill to permit the televising of Supreme Court proceedings; Specter, Leahy, Cornyn, Grassley, Schumer, Feingold, Durbin; S. 829, Sunshine in the Courtroom Act of 2005; Grassley, Schumer, Conlyn, Leahy, Feingold, Durbin, Graham, DeWine, Specter; S. 489, Federal Consent Decree Fairness Act; Alexander, Kyl, Cornyn, Graham, Hatch; S. 2039, Prosecutors and Defenders Incentive Act of 2005; Durbin, Specter, DeWine, Leahy, Kennedy, Feinstein, Feingold; S. 2292, A bill to provide relief for the Federal judiciary from excessive rent charges; Specter, Leahy, Cornyn, Feinstein, Biden; S. 2453, National Security Surveillance Act of 2006; Specter; S. 2455, Terrorist Surveillance Act of 2006; DeWine, Graham. III. Matters; S.J. Res. 1, Marriage Protection Amendment; Allard, Sessions, Kyl, Hatch, Cornyn, Coburn, Brownback; S. Res. 398, A resolution relating to the censure of George W. Bush; Feingold.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, let me just say to the Senator, I do not believe we will be able to get a recorded vote before lunchtime on the Wyden-Grassley-Inhofe issue. We might be able to set that aside and take up yours and get it disposed of before lunch, if that would be convenient to the Senator. I am not asking that yet, but I believe we will probably do that.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, after conferring with our colleagues on this side of the aisle, I ask unanimous consent that the vote in relation to the Reid amendment No. 2932 occur at 11:30 a.m., with no second degrees in order prior to the vote, and that all time be equally divided until the vote.

Mr. LOTT. Will the Senator withhold on that?

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I suggest to the Senator that if the Senator wants to offer a second-degree amendment, it sounds like it could be offered to just about every other amendment pending.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, to clarify, we will need to go back to the Reid amendment or was that automatic under the agreement, so we are back on the Reid amendment?

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could respond to the parliamentary inquiry before the Chair comments on it, we did get an agreement that yours would be next in order. That was in the previous unanimous consent agreement.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, that was not what was agreed to, as I understand the question, from the Senator from Oklahoma. We have the Reid amendment, and then the next in order was going to be the Santorum-Dodd amendment. Then we were going to go to Senator Wyden, and then the consent was that the Senator from Oklahoma would be next in order, to offer his amendment and have debate at that point.

Mr. LOTT. Was that the way it was agreed to?

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the Senator is correct. He came here early on, ready to go. But there had already been discussion with Senator Santorum about being able to offer his amendment. We try to go back and forth from one side of the aisle to the other.

Mr. LOTT. He was just speaking. He didn't have an amendment.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, No. 1, we have an order of how amendments will go. On a separate track, we were debating the Reid amendment, and we were alternating back and forth, having speakers speak on the Reid amendment. That is where there seems be maybe a dichotomy. Senator Carper was going to speak next. Then Senator Inhofe would be able to speak next. That was my understanding.

Mr. LOTT. Was there a request pending?

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: What is the status of the agenda at this time?

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, you say in a minute. Do we have other speakers?

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