Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I have not propounded a unanimous consent request other than to proceed to the short-term continuing resolution so that Senator Byrd may begin to discuss an issue of concern to a number of Senators. I intended to talk to the Senator from Montana and others about trying to enter into an agreement with regard to time. On the issue to which he referred, I think it is very important that we do take action in this final bill we will be taking up in the next day or so, or today, that will make sure the satellite bill is passed so that people across this country will continue to receive service from the networks on their television sets in the future in order to have this so-called local-to-local service where you get your local station on your local satellite. We are going to have to have some process, some way to get that service into rural areas and smaller areas such as those in Montana, Alaska, and in Mississippi. I am committed to getting that done. So is the Senator from Alaska, Mr. Stevens. We are going to get that done. We are going to have to have a very carefully thought out loan guarantee system that will get the satellites up, to get the towers that are necessary to make sure that that is done. The problem we have, as with so many other issues we have been dealing with in the last week, is getting all of that done in the last few hours to make sure we get it done right without the whole process being held up as we go forward. I will talk to the Senator privately, but he has my assurances-- Senator Daschle and I will put a colloquy in the Record--that we are going to get this done. We are going to get it done early next year. If there are dilatory tactics, we will have a bill that has been carefully massaged by all of the relevant committees, not just one. We will either get it done straight up or we will look for another vehicle. This is something to which we are committed, to which I am committed, and I know the Senator from Alaska is committed.

Mr. LOTT. Will the Senator yield to me to respond?

Mr. LOTT

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded so that the Senator from Minnesota can----

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

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

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, my goal from the outset has been to protect used car buyers from title fraud. The solution I proposed was simple, straightforward, and modeled after the recommendations of the Motor Vehicle Titling, Registration, and Salvage Advisory Committee. S. 655 merely establishes model uniform definitions and disclosure requirements for four basic terms: salvage; rebuilt salvage; flood; and nonrepairable vehicles. Under the legislation reported out by the Senate Commerce Committee, states would be free to utilize additional terms and to provide additional disclosures beyond those provided for in this bill. States that choose to adopt the four uniform terms and related provisions would be eligible for incentive grants. No state would be penalized for non-participation or for retaining different standards. While there is substantial and broad support for this much needed legislation, there continues to be resistance to moving forward with this legislation in the Senate. Unfortunately, this resistance has the effect of allowing unsuspecting consumers to continue to purchase and drive potentially life-threatening vehicles. Delaying this legislation will cost used car buyers another $4 billion this year and place millions of structurally unsafe vehicles back on America's roads and highways. Roads that our family, friends, and neighbors share every day. Even though S. 655 has wide-spread support and follows the recommendations of the Congressionally-chartered Salvage Advisory Committee, a few groups have attempted to undermine this measure at every stage of the process. Unfortunately, these groups seemed to have convinced some of my colleagues that it is better to delay the implementation of clearly needed consumer protections and continue to press for the imposition of untried, untested and in many cases anti- consumer requirements. Requirements that states have rejected time and again. Provisions that focus on post-purchase redress rather than pre- purchase disclosure. Definitions and standards that would perpetuate confusion rather than promote uniformity among the states, undermining the very purpose of this legislation. These groups claim to have the interests of consumers in mind, yet the best representative of car- buying consumers, the American Automobile Association, has rejected their approach and supports passage of S. 655. As I am sure my colleagues will agree, advancing titling definitions and standards that states have rejected, and will continue to reject, will only exacerbate title fraud. Such an approach only benefits those who prey on unsuspecting car buyers and would jeopardize the minimum standards required to make the program work, unnecessarily harm many vehicle owners and buyers by needlessly reducing the value of their vehicles, create unreasonable or untested standards, foster unnecessary litigation, impinge on states rights, and promote a scheme that states will reject. During the 104th and 105th Congresses, this was a bipartisan, better yet nonpartisan, initiative. My only interest has been to protect consumers by encouraging the use of minimal uniform disclosure standards for severely damaged vehicles--those involved in a serious accident, severely damaged by falling objects, or vehicles that have sustained significant and lingering water damage. Whether the used car buyer is in Mississippi, California, Nevada, Minnesota, or in any other state, he or she needs the pre-purchase disclosure information that S. 655 would provide. I have made every effort to reach consensus on this legislation. In that vein, a number of changes were incorporated throughout the legislative process to address the concerns of State attorneys general, certain consumer groups, and many of my colleagues. The latest version of this legislation incorporates the full range of changes that DMV administrators, including California's Administrator, believe are practicable. The substitute makes it very clear that there is no preemption of state law. The substitute also mirrors much of the State of California's current titling requirements, ensuring that minimal change will be required by our largest state should it choose to apply for the bill's grant monies. Mr. President, even though I have made numerous compromises on this legislation, the goal post continues to move further away. Instead of gaining acceptance, I was recently presented with yet another round of proposed modifications. AAMVA reviewed these proposed changes and determined they would eviscerate the purpose of this legislation. AAMVA opposes these additional changes because they could potentially harm the very people this legislation aims to protect, create a mountain of unnecessary paperwork, and would create a substantial amount of bureaucracy with no added value. It makes no sense to adopt provisions that the experts on titling matters believe are harmful to used car consumers, the very people this balanced legislation aims to protect. AAMVA, Secretaries of State, local and state law enforcement, state legislators, and the automotive and insurance industries have repeatedly pronounced their support for S. 655. AAA and the California DMV also agree that my substitute bill is the right legislative solution. Mr. President, if we do not pass this legislation, the real loser is the unfortunate used car buyer in these and other states who unknowingly purchases a wreck on wheels, perhaps a previously totaled government crash test vehicle. Every day that Congress fails to act on this prudent title branding legislation, thousands of individuals are harmed and millions of dollars are lost to the unscrupulous practice of title laundering. Let's pass this bill now.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I am proud to add the American Automobile Association (AAA) and the California DMV to the long list of organizations that support S. 655, the National Salvage Motor Vehicle Consumer Protection Act that I introduced during this session to protect consumers from title fraud. Other supporters of my title branding legislation include the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), state DMV directors around the country, the Michigan Secretary of State and other Secretaries of State, the International Union of Police Associations AFL-CIO, International Association of Auto Theft Investigators, National Odometer and Title Fraud Enforcement Association, American Automobile Manufacturers Association, Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, National Automobile Dealers Association, National Association of Minority Automobile Dealers, National Independent Automobile Dealers Association, Honda North America, Nissan North America, Carfax, CarMax, American Service Industry Association, American Automotive Leasing Association, American Car Rental Association, American Salvage Pool Association, Automotive Engine Rebuilders Association, Automotive Parts and Accessories Association, Automotive Parts Rebuilders Association, National Association of Fleet Resale Dealers, National Auto Auction Association, and State Farm Insurance. I also think it is worth recognizing 23 of our colleagues who have actively signaled their intention to protect motorists in their state and throughout the nation by formally supporting S. 655. Senators McCain, Breaux, Stevens, Conrad, Burns, Hutchison, Frist, Abraham, Mack, Warner, Bennett, Sessions, Murkowski, Shelby, Inhofe, Grams, Thomas, Roberts, Hatch, Thompson, Enzi, Kyl, and Hutchinson are to be commended for cosponsoring this important consumer protection measure. The American Automobile Association represents over 40 million drivers. It is a nonpartisan organization that champions the interests of the driving public in virtually every city, county, and state across this great land. AAA supports S. 655 because it shares my belief that national standards for titling salvage, rebuilt salvage, non-repairable and flood damaged vehicles will help prevent the fraudulent sale of damaged vehicles and protect consumers from unknowingly purchasing them. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print AAA's letter of support for S. 655 in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I now ask the Senate turn to the adjournment resolution, H. Con. Res. 235, the resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, all without intervening action or debate.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the second amendment.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I am honored they would allow me to do this on their behalf because I believe they were not treated properly in the wee hours of the morning with regard to an amount of money for disaster assistance for North Carolina. We are determined to assist them in getting that. We hope this will be accepted by the House in this form. But if not in this form, we will be back to carry out our commitment to the people in North Carolina and as a symbol to people all across America that, when it comes to disasters, there are no party lines and there is no division between the Capitol; we will do what is necessary to help people when they are desperate and need help. So I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent the Senate resume the consideration of H.J. Res. 82 and there be 5 minutes of debate on each of the two amendments in order to the resolution.

Mr. LOTT. Therefore, at least one further vote will occur yet tonight. In addition, the Senate will convene tomorrow at 10 a.m., and hopefully process some legislative items that have been cleared and that would be considered by the House. The Senate could also consider the Work Incentives conference report. Therefore votes can be expected to occur during the session of the Senate on Friday. We will stay in close touch with both sides of the aisle to see when the best time might be for that. We will try to accommodate as many Senators as possible and stack them if we need to.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, has all time expired?

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to offer an amendment at this time on behalf of Senators Helms and Edwards of North Carolina with regard to funds for their disaster. And I ask unanimous consent that that vote occur in a stacked sequence, after it is debated, after the vote on the amendment by Senator Byrd and Senator McConnell, and that the first vote be just 10 minutes, and then the second vote would be 10 minutes also.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send to the desk then the amendment on behalf of Senators Helms and Edwards.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask that the Chair lay before the Senate the conference report to accompany the DC appropriations bill, H.R. 3194, and the conference report be considered as having been read.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I thank Senator Byrd for yielding me the time. I join in wishing a very happy birthday to our friend from Alaska. He makes the Senate a better place. He keeps us lively. He works hard. He makes sure we get our job done, and he does it with a lot of alacrity sometimes. He will get right up in your face and make sure you understand. That helps to clear the subject up in many instances. He is a great guy. I am honored to be able to serve in this institution with the great Senator from Alaska who does so much for our country and certainly for his State of Alaska. I will not tell his wife, the lovely, charming wife to whom he is married, what his age is today because I assume she doesn't know what his actual age is. We will keep that a secret. But happy birthday to our great friend.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I will say on behalf of Senator Helms, he has been following this very closely. I have spoken to him, and Senator Edwards has been in constant conversation with him, as has Senator Stevens. He understands what we are doing here, and we have made a commitment to him, which we certainly are going to honor, and to Senator Edwards, that we will pursue this aggressively with the other Chamber. This money is going to be available, hopefully in this CR; if not, the first available vehicle next year.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I know the Senator from North Carolina might want to make a comment or ask a question at this point. I will be glad to yield the floor to him, or yield for him to do that while retaining the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 10, 1999, beginning at 10 a.m., in Dirksen Room 226, to conduct a hearing.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, November 10, 1999 after the first vote, approximately 12 p.m., in the President's Room to conduct a markup.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Senator Hatch will have to speak for himself but it is my understanding that he supports all of these nominations and will support cloture if necessary.

Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor.