Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I would be glad to yield to Senator Leahy, and I will come back to Senator Abraham, if he desires to have some additional time.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I want to clarify a point. As author of this legislation and as a member of the Commerce Committee where this legislation originated--I am a member of that committee--does the Senator object to having banking representation as a part of this conference? I note that the House bill has several provisions that are clearly banking-type provisions. Does the Senator see a problem with that?

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to appoint the conferees to S. 761, the Millennium Digital Commerce Act.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could respond to the distinguished Democratic whip, this is for conferees on this Millennium Digital Commerce Act. We have tried, over the past couple of weeks, to get clearance to appoint conferees. The recommendation was that we have, I believe, 11 from the Commerce Committee, 3 from Banking--6 and 5 and 2 and 1. For some reason, there have been objections to that. There continue to be objections, but this is a bill that has broad support in the industry and on both sides of the aisle. So I am confused and perplexed about why we can't get these conferees appointed and move forward to this conference. So it has not been signed off on, as I understand it. But since I talked to the Democratic leader last week twice, I thought perhaps we had reached a point where this could be done.

Mr. LOTT. I think that clearly would be the intent of our conferees. Therefore, I assume Senator Leahy would support getting conferees appointed and going to conference. Is that correct?

Mr. LOTT. They appointed only five.

Mr. LOTT. As is our tradition around here, it could be the Abraham- Leahy bill, or the Lott-Daschle bill, or something other bill.

Mr. LOTT. They did not appoint anybody from the Banking Committee, as I understand it.

Mr. LOTT. I assume the Senator has been interested and involved in this.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank both Senators for their comments.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I thank the President pro tempore.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today we observe and celebrate a milestone in the life of one of our most respected colleagues. On Saturday, March 4, Senator Robert C. Byrd became the third longest-serving Senator in the history of this august body--surpassing the service of the venerable and beloved John Stennis of my State, who served 41 years and 2 months. This November, Senator Byrd will surpass the service of Senator Carl Hayden which will mean that we will be novices working alongside two of the longest-serving Senators in history. Both of them are here with us now--Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd. Just think about that. They will be the top two in history in tenure, and we will be serving with both of them. It is more than about tenure, however, when you talk about Strom Thurmond or Robert C. Byrd. In the case of Senator Byrd, in his 41-plus years, colleagues have placed their trust in him to hold the highest offices in this institution. He was among those who were elected to the leadership positions but also at the committee level. He has been both the majority leader and the minority leader; he has been President pro tempore; and he has chaired our Committee on Appropriations. Today he is the ranking Democrat on that very important committee. What he has brought to those positions has been more than hard work and high skills. He has brought a passion for procedures, an insistence upon order. On occasion, he has reminded me what the rules are or what order requires. It is always intended to be helpful because he believes that the institution itself is more important than any one Senator. On occasion, he has regaled the Senate with a discourse on antiquity and, more specifically, the history of Greece and Rome and, of course, the Roman Senate. Yet when Senator Byrd speaks, Senators actually come out of the Cloakroom and our offices and listen, enthralled, to the history that he knows and the quotes that he gives from memory. He has inspired us many times both in the antiquity that he talks about and also the very great personal stories that he tells and the quotations. I remember he had a quote when I had a grandson born a year and a half ago about the beauty of being a grandparent, and it was just one of the most beautiful things I have ever heard on the floor of the Senate, maybe not so much as to who had said it, or how he was saying it, but who he was saying it about. He did a beautiful job. He speaks of great historic events and he quotes from the Bible. And yet he has spoken personally, humanly, about the wonders of life, and even to being the owner of a wonderful dog named Billy, in such a way that has brought tears to our eyes. Having seen ``My Dog, Skip'' just this past weekend, I know sometimes the beauty of an animal or dog in your family will bring tears quicker than anything perhaps. In today's world, where anything older than a decade is considered ancient, his knowledge of the classical world is truly extraordinary, and his insistence that its somber lessons are relevant to our own times is truly sobering. In seasons of turmoil, it is the Senate's role to give the Nation the reassurance of stability and endurance. That is what the framers of our Constitution intended when they devised an upper Chamber that would be a steady anchor against the wild winds of public passion and hasty action. Senator Byrd's magnificent addresses on the history of the Senate chronicle the work of Senators--whether renowned or obscure--who have toiled in this body for causes larger than their own advancement, both here in this room and in the old Chamber where the Senate did its work until 1859. Senator Byrd's personal heroes, such as Richard Russell of Georgia, have pursued duty rather than passing glory, and in the process won for themselves a lasting remembrance in the annals of representative democracy. Because of my own southern background and because of Senator Byrd's comments over the years, things he has noted about Senator Russell, I have gone back and read some of the history of this great Senator. It was interesting to me to note that others indicated he surely could have been the majority leader. Clearly, he could have assumed any role he wanted in the Senate. But he chose not to do that. He chose instead to be chairman of the Armed Services Committee, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, to be involved in everything that happened in the Senate. He was truly a unique Senator in many ways. Today, we celebrate and stand in respectful witness to the history that Robert Byrd is making as the Senator from West Virginia who, for 41 years and 2 months, has pursued duty rather than passing glory for causes larger than his own advancement. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I noted late Thursday night that I was very much impressed and pleased with the way that legislation went through the Senate and that we were able to get to conclusion. I made a particular note of the fine work the Senator from Nevada did, helping keep Members focused on the issue at hand, the issue before us, and also reducing the number of amendments and helping make it possible for us to complete that bill on Thursday night. I have to say the Senator, since he has been elected as the whip, assistant Democratic leader, has made a difference in our ability to complete important legislation. I think that was an example of how we can proceed. That was a good bill that had bipartisan support. I know a lot in the minority did not like it but several in the minority did vote for it because it wound up getting 61 votes, which means even if it got every Republican--and I didn't check to see if every one voted for it, but probably at least a half dozen Democrats also voted for it. It is a good example of how we can proceed. Amendments were agreed to that were related to education, related to tax policy on education, and a couple of amendments such as the Wellstone amendment were not directly related, but Senators had something they wanted to offer. We were given an opportunity to take a look at the Wellstone amendment and basically said, sure, we can agree to that. But it did not become just flypaper to attach every amendment Senators could come up with. We did not get off into a lot of extraneous debate. Most of the week was spent focused on education and education tax policy, and that is the way we would like it to proceed. It seemed to me the week before last that we were not going to be able to proceed, and we were going to have to go to cloture, which I always prefer not to do. I prefer to go forward without long debate and delay by amendments. But if I am given the impression, or told, in effect, we are going to offer all kinds of extraneous amendments, I have to look for some way to bring it to conclusion and get a final vote. That is why I filed cloture the end of the week, the previous week. Then, on Monday morning, Senator Daschle called and said he thought that basically the parameters of the unanimous consent request we had offered were fair, but there were some Senators who still thought they had other issues they would like addressed. But he thought maybe we could work on it that morning--I believe it was Monday morning; it may have been Tuesday morning--but we could work through it and get a fair agreement. As a matter of fact, by noon that day we had done so. So I hope this will be the procedure we can use in the future. We may have the opportunity to see if we can do that even this very week because I have been urging and pushing Senators to come to an agreement on how to proceed on the Export Administration Act. This is something we need to do. This is something people who are in the export business want to get clarified. We have not had an export law on the books since the one that was passed in 1979. My goodness, in this area of export of technology, for instance, it changes weekly, let alone annually. We clearly need to do this. I think the concept of this bill is something the administration generally supports. It came out of committee unanimously. There are some legitimate concerns from members of the Armed Services Committee, the Foreign Relations Committee, the Government Affairs Committee, and the Intelligence Committee about how do we deal with national security issues; how can we carve out national security issues; how can we make sure it is not a unilateral decision made by the Commerce Department; and how are the State Department and Defense Department going to be involved. But a lot of work is being done on that. I am hoping we can go forward on that bill Tuesday or Wednesday of this week and find a way to complete it. But we will not be able to do it unless we find cooperation on both sides of the aisle, and I hope maybe the education bill can be an example we can follow. It may even be easier in this case because I think there is actually broader bipartisan support. So I appreciate what Senator Reid had to say. I agree with it. I hope that is the example we can use as we go forward this year. We have a lot of work. In spite of distractions, in spite of elections, we still have work to do for the American people. It is important we find a way to do that for the best interests of our country. I thank Senator Reid for his contribution in that effort.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. As announced last week, there will be no rollcall votes in today's session. In addition, as a reminder to all Members, rollcall votes may begin as early as 5 p.m. on Tuesday. Those votes may be in relation to any pending judicial nominations on the Executive Calendar. For the remainder of the week, the Senate may consider further nominations on the calendar as well as the FAA reauthorization conference report and the export administration bill. This is the final week of Senate business prior to next week's recess, of course, and I would encourage my colleagues to remain available throughout this week for votes. They will occur each day and very likely could go into the evening, particularly on Wednesday and Thursday. Of course, we have a number of Senators who are back in their respective States today and tomorrow because we have some 13 or 15 States that are having caucuses or primaries on Tuesday, and a number of our colleagues will be prepared to vote early in their respective States tomorrow and then be here by 5 o'clock for the recorded vote.

Mr. LOTT. Today, the Senate will be conducting a period of morning business in order to allow Senators to make statements and introduce legislation. Extension of Morning Business I now ask unanimous consent that the period of morning business be extended until 5 p.m. with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. We thank you for the job you do as the President pro tempore and the fact that you keep us on time. ``In time and on time,'' that is the motto for Strom Thurmond. We thank the Chaplain for his beautiful prayer as always.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask consent the motion to reconsider be deemed to have been tabled and the vote now occur on the Boxer amendment, which would be the same vote that occurred earlier. That way, we will have a definite clarification of what the vote was and is.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2876

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, are we ready for debate time on the next amendment?

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

Mr. LOTT. Has the motion to reconsider been tabled?

Mr. LOTT. I yield to the distinguished minority leader.

Mr. LOTT. That is an important point, Mr. President.

Mr. LOTT. I didn't get a clarification on the rule. I believe a simple clerical error--perhaps there is no precedent for that. If that is the case, then I think it would be appropriate to correct that or reconsider the vote. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the chair.