Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT. I now move to commit the bill with instructions and send the motion to the desk. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. LOTT. I send an amendment to the desk to the motion to commit with instructions.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, over the past three decades, concern for our environment and natural resources has grown--as has the desire to recycle and reuse. You may be surprised to learn that one major environmental statue actually creates an impediment to recycling. Superfund has created this impediment, although unintended by the law's authors. Because of the harm that is being done to the recycling effort by the unintended consequence of law, the distinguished minority leader, Mr. Daschle, and I introduced the Superfund Recycling Equity Act, S. 1528. This bill removes Superfund's recycling impediments and increases America's recycling rates. We had one and only one purpose in introducing the Superfund Recycling Equity Act--to remove from the liability loop those who collect and ship recyclables to a third party site. The bill is not intended to plow new Superfund ground, nor is it intended to revamp existing Superfund law. That task is appropriately left to comprehensive reform, a goal that I hope is achievable. While the bill proposes to amend Superfund, Mr. President, it is really a recycling bill. Recycling is not disposal and shipping for recycling is not arranging for disposal--it is a relatively simple clarification, but one that is necessary to maintain a successful recycling effort nationwide. Without this clarification, America will continue to fall short of its recycling goal. S. 1528 was negotiated in 1993 between representatives of the industry that recycles traditional materials--paper, glass, plastic, metals, textiles and rubber--and representatives of the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, and the national environmental community. Similar language has been included in virtually every comprehensive Superfund bill since 1994. With nearly 50 Senate cosponsors, support for the bill has been both extensive and bipartisan. Since Senator Daschle and I introduced S. 1528, some have argued that we should not ``piecemeal'' Superfund. They argue that every part of Superfund should be held together tightly, until a comprehensive approach to reauthorization is found. And given the broad-based support for the recycling piece across both parties, some think it should be held as a ``sweetener'' for some of the more difficult issues. Superfund's long history suggests, however, that the recycling provisions--as sweet as they are--have done little, if anything, to help move a comprehensive Superfund bill forward. Rather, ``sweeteners'' like brownfields and municipal liability are what keep all parties at the table. Holding the recyclers hostage to a comprehensive bill has not helped reform Superfund, and continuing to hold them hostage will not ensure action in the future. What it does ensure is that recycling continues to be impeded and fails to attain our nation's goals. This recycling fix is minuscule compared to the overwhelming stakeholder needs regarding Superfund in general, but so significant for the recycling industry itself. It is easy to see why this bill has achieved such widespread bipartisan support among our colleagues. S. 1528 addresses only one Superfund issue--the unintended consequence of law that holds recyclers responsible for the actions of those who purchase their goods. The goal of this bill is to remove the liability facing recyclers, not to establish who should be responsible for those shares if the unintended liability is removed. Senator Daschle and I have heard from various parties who want to add minor provisions outside the scope of the bill. Although many have presented interesting and often compelling arguments, I will continue to ask that any party wishing to enlarge the narrow focus of S. 1528 show support on both sides of the aisle, as well as from the administration and the environmental community. Much time, energy and expertise went into crafting an agreement where few thought it was possible. That agreement has been maintained through four separate Congresses where all sorts of attempts to modify it have failed. Congress should accept this delicately crafted product. S. 1528 shows Congress' commitment to protect and increase recycling. S. 1528 repeats what we all know and support--that continued and expanded recycling is a national goal. S. 1528 removes impediments to achieving this goal, impediments Congress never intended to occur. The nearly 50 Senators who have already co-sponsored this bill recognize the need to amend Superfund for the very important purpose of increasing recycling in the public interest. Let's act this year.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I understand the junior Senator from Rhode Island is on the floor and would like to make remarks, too. I ask consent he be allowed to succeed my remarks in the Record.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, this morning I was actually in Lexington, KY, with my son and daughter and grandson. I think in a way that made me even more melancholy and mournful about this day and the loss of our good friend John Chafee. I started thinking about John and his life. It made me realize that, day by day, in our regular duties, we go busily about our business and we do not stop, sometimes, to look at the beautiful surroundings, this historic building we are in. We don't stop, sometimes, to thank the staff member who has been particularly helpful to us. Also, sometimes we don't stop to think that we walk with men and women in this institution who have been giants in their lives. John Chafee was one of those men. Sometimes we just forgot John Chafee had done so much for his country, for his fellow man, for his State, and for his Nation. It was easy to do that because John was not the kind of guy who demanded attention and demanded he be treated with reverence or any extraordinary respect. He was a soft-spoken gentleman, and he was truly a ``gentle'' man. The word fit him perfectly. I was just talking to Senator Warner, his good friend, his successor as the Secretary of the Navy. I never had quite thought about one other thing: John Chafee was not one given to temper, not one given to profanity. He was just a dedicated, hard-working, good Senator for his State and for our country. So I believe we truly have lost one of the best servants we have had in the Senate in my time here, our friend John Chafee, the senior Senator from Rhode Island. I first got to know John Chafee some 30 years ago; it is hard to believe, I say to Senator Warner, who was his deputy over there at the Navy Department. John was the Secretary of the Navy. I had the occasion to meet with him as a staff member because there was a little disagreement between his State and my State about a Seabee base. But he was always so fair in all his dealings; it impressed me then. I didn't realize at the time that he had already been Governor and he had such a distinguished military career. There he was, the Secretary of the Navy. Then, of course, he went on to be elected to the Senate. Only after I came to the Senate did I realize he truly was a war hero, a marine. He was very proud of it. He defended his country, and he was a highly decorated combat veteran. He served his people so well as Governor of that State, and he also served the people of that State as a Senator since 1976. I have given a lot of thought about Senator Chafee today; also, the fact the last time I saw him and spoke to him personally, last Thursday, he was not feeling particularly well. He wanted to know if there were going to be any more votes. But he was staying right back here, waiting to see if he was going to be needed anymore, attending to his duties, even on Thursday night of last week. I think it is belated but appropriate that we say a few kind words about Senator Chafee and his service. We extend our best to his wife Ginny and to his family. By the age of 39, John Chafee was already a combat veteran in two wars. You will not find it in his official biography, but he earned at least two Purple Hearts, among many other service distinctions. He had left his undergraduate studies at Yale University to first enlist in the Marines. He served in the original invasion forces of the Battle of Guadalcanal during World War II. Following that, he resumed his studies at Yale and went on to earn his law degree at Harvard. John was recalled to active duty in 1951, and while in Korea he commanded Dog Company, a 200-man rifle unit in the 1st Marine Division. Perhaps Senator Warner has already recounted all of that, but it is such an impressive part of the man he was. After 6 years in the Rhode Island General Assembly, including 4 years as his party's leader in the House of Representatives, John was elected Governor of Rhode Island in 1962 by 398 votes--not one to waste any votes, or anything else for that matter. He was reelected in 1964 and 1966 by the largest margins in Rhode Island's history. The newly-inaugurated President Nixon appointed John Chafee to be Secretary of the Navy in 1969, a post he held for 3\1/2\ years. He was elected to his fourth term in 1994 with 65 percent of the vote. He was the first Republican elected to the Senate from Rhode Island in 68 years. In the Senate, he rose to become chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee where, once again, he worked very aggressively on issues about which he felt strongly. He was a Senator who really did care about the environment. But he tried to make it an issue where we reached across the aisle to each other. He wasn't interested just in making a statement or trying to drive up his ratings with one group or another. He wanted to get results. I remember he came to me when I had first been elected majority leader in 1996. He said: I believe we can pass this safe drinking water bill. It had been stalled in the Senate and the House, and it was stalled in conference. I said: John, it's too late. We can't do it. He said: If we come to agreement, will we get it up for a vote? I said: If you can get Dirk Kempthorne and the others involved and get Democrats involved, and we can get a bill that will be good for America, to have safe drinking water, why, surely we will do it. I think it was the last day of the session, but right at the end we got it done because John Chafee would not give it up. He wasn't interested in making a statement. He was interested in getting a good bill for his country--Safe Drinking Water--a worthy cause and one of which John Chafee was very proud. Even recently, he was working on efforts that are certainly worthwhile and have been very difficult to bring to closure. The day will come when we will get a new Superfund bill, and when we do, we ought to dedicate it to the memory of John Chafee because he has charged that mountain as a good marine, time and time again. We never have quite made it. One of these days we will top the crest, and we will all think about John Chafee when we do. He was an important member of the Finance Committee. He chaired the Social Security and Family Policy Subcommittee. Again, just last week I arrived late at a Finance Committee meeting before we went out to mark up a bill providing assistance for hospitals, nursing homes, and home health care, a bill that would put back some Medicare money as a result of the balanced budget agreement. It was about to come apart. The wheels were coming off. Senators were disagreeing. It looked as if what was going to be a bipartisan package, easily passed out, that had been crafted by the chairman, Senator Roth, and the ranking member, Senator Moynihan of New York, was going to fall apart right there in that little anteroom before we went into the Finance Committee meeting. One of the last people to speak was John Chafee. He said: Good work has been done on this; it is not everything we would want--typical of John Chafee to say that--but it is a good step. We ought to do it. We ought to go out here right now, take this bill up, and pass it out of the Finance Committee. Thirty minutes later, by a voice vote, with only two dissenting audible nays, we passed that bill out. He did his part on the Finance Committee, too. He served as a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence, where he had a real interest in making sure about the intelligence capabilities of our country, to make sure we did not drop our guard in that area, and we started rebuilding our intelligence community after years of problems, going back, I guess, to the 1970s. He was chairman of the Senate Republican Conference for 6 years, the No. 3 leadership position in the Senate. In the Senate, we knew John as a genuinely independent New Englander, respected on both sides of the aisle, who worked to bring opposing sides together for the common good. All of us regretted his decision announced earlier this year to leave the Senate, but it was characteristic of John to work to the very end. He leaves behind 5 children, 12 grandchildren, and a legacy of a lifetime of service to Rhode Island and to his Nation. If the Biblical quote ever applied to any Senator, this quote should apply to John Chafee: Well done, thy good and faithful servant. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 206, and I ask that the resolution be read.

Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor, Mr. President.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I thank the Senator.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, this cloture vote will occur on Tuesday, October 26. I will notify all Senators as to the exact time of the cloture vote. In the meantime, I now ask unanimous consent the mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. LOTT. I thank the chairman of the Finance Committee and ranking member for being here and being willing to proceed on this important legislation. I do think we have an opportunity with this CBI and African free trade legislation to be able to have better relations and trade with Central America, with the Caribbean, and with Africa. I believe it will be in the interests of all countries concerned. It is the right attitude. There are a lot of terms being thrown around in recent weeks about isolationism. This is clearly a case where, by trading with countries in Central America, the Caribbean and Africa, we can open up not only trade but relationships and opportunities for peoples in all the countries involved, including the United States. So I am glad we have proceeded to this legislation. The Senate has been debating the motion to proceed because there had been objection to going to the bill itself. That is as a result of the objection to its immediate consideration by Senator Hollings. I wanted to see if maybe we could go ahead, get started, have some debate and amendments and then not have to debate the motion to proceed and then debate the bill itself, but it looks as if we are not able to at this time proceed in that way. Since there has been objection and this is an important trade bill, one with major implications, one I discussed with the President three times this week alone, about his interest and concern and support of this legislation, I think it is important we file cloture and try to find a way to stop a threatened filibuster and move to the substance of the bill. Cloture Motion

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I say to my colleague from New York, I will be brief. I have a cloture motion to file. But I do also want to comment just briefly on the remarks of the Senator from Alabama. I thank him for his remarks. He is raising very important concerns--ones that I have discussed with the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and I have written to the Secretary of Defense expressing my concerns. As a result of the correspondence with the Secretary of Defense, and our worry about the Chinese involvement in the Panama Canal through a particular company having control of port facilities on both ends of the Panama Canal, our concern is about what is their relationship with the Chinese Government as well as other concerns as we move toward turning over the Panama Canal on December 31. Narcoterrorism is of concern in the area, as well as corruption in the government. We do, at this very moment, have a hearing underway in the Senate Armed Services Committee. We have had Members of Congress testify about their concerns. We have a panel now that includes General Wilhelm, who has jurisdiction for our military over that region; Ambassador Gutierrez from the State Department, answering questions; as well as the Honorable Aleman Zubieta who is Deputy Administrator, I believe, of the Commission. That testimony is underway right now. Secretary Weinberger is there. I know they are looking forward to Senator Sessions returning to ask questions. There may be no problem here, although there is clearly a problem with narcoterrorism and corruption in the government. But I think we have an absolute responsibility to ask questions and get into the law about how this is going to work. There is a provision in Law No. 5, as it is described in Panama, that raises some questions about how U.S. military vessels would have access to the Panama Canal after December 31. To the extent they say they would have right of passage provided it didn't interfere with the operations of the Panama Canal, we need to make sure we know what is happening there. We are going to carry out our responsibilities in that effort. I thank Senator Sessions for his work in that also.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 215.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of the conference report to accompany the Interior appropriations bill (H.R. 2466) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration. The report will be stated.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I further ask consent that the conference report be considered as read, the report be agreed to, with the motion to reconsider laid upon the table, and I ask consent that any statements be printed in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, as in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that on Monday, October 25, it be in order for the majority leader, after consultation with the Democratic leader, to proceed to executive session in order to consider the following nominations on the Executive Calendar: Nos. 253, 254, 255, 257, 278, and 279.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I object to the addition of those nominees at this time, although we are working to see if at some point one or both of these nominees could be considered.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the remaining votes in this series be limited in length to 10 minutes each.

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

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I understand we are ready now to do a series of three votes back to back. For the information of all Senators, these votes will be the last votes of the day. It will be my intention to begin debate on the African trade bill, which includes, of course, the CBI enhancement provisions, immediately following these votes. It is my hope that the Senate will begin debating and amending the bill yet this evening because we do have some more time that we could keep working on this bill. I had the opportunity this afternoon to talk to the President about this legislation. He is committed to being of assistance in any way he can to the Senate taking this bill up and passing it in its present form. I have been working with the Democratic leader, the chairman and ranking member of the committee, all of whom support this legislation. This is a free trade initiative that will be good for a America, good for the Caribbean Basin, and good for Africa. Assuming the Senate begins debate on this bill, any votes relative to amendments would be postponed to occur at a time determined by the majority leader after consultation with the Democratic leader. On Monday, the Senate will be debating the African trade bill with the CBI provisions. I will propose to confirm six nominations from the Executive Calendar. If debate is necessary on these nominations, that debate would also occur on Monday. However, the votes, if necessary, would be postponed to occur on Tuesday at 9:30 a.m. I thank all Members, and will notify each Senator as the voting situation becomes clearer. Based on what I said, I believe we will have only debate on Friday. It is not clear at this time what the situation would be with regard to Monday. We will have debate. We do have nominations we want to clear. But we will be in communication with both sides of the aisle and notify the Members as soon as further decisions can be made. amendment no. 2324 I ask for the yeas and nays on amendment No. 2324.

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