Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I thank Senator Nickles again for his cooperation. I do think as we go forward it is very likely some of these amendments will not take the full time. I assume some of them may even be agreed to by both sides. I also think it is possible we might be going along with pretty hot debate and Senators may want a little extra time. Usually, we try to accommodate each other, if there really is a need for it, on both sides of the aisle. I am not advocating it now. I think we could nitpick it to death, but I think we have come about as close as we possibly can. I do have two other announcements I would like to make.

Mr. LOTT. There was not a time limit on the earlier bill in the general debate in the earlier unanimous consent. There is 3 hours in this unanimous consent. Instead of the 2 hours on the first- and second-degree amendments, 2 hours each, there is 100 minutes on each one of them.

Mr. LOTT. I think there will be full opportunity to talk about the substance of the issue and the bills pending, and amendments would be offered. I think after 2 or 3 days on this issue, most of the issues that need to be debated--or all of the issues--will have been addressed. Senator Daschle and I will have talked back and forth about that. I think once we have some critical debate and some critical amendments, the Members will think they have had the opportunity to be heard and will have made their points. So I think there is going to be plenty of time here. It doesn't specify amendments. It doesn't specify a maximum or a minimum. There are some time limitations, which is the orderly way to do business around here, but there is not going to be any effort to have two or three amendments and then forestall everything else. You could not do it under this arrangement.

Mr. LOTT. It is my intent to move forward in the normal fashion that we deal with these legislative days. Of course, we always take into consideration conflicts that one party or the other may have. There will be no intent to have short days. We intend to have long days so we can have adequate discussion. Let me express my appreciation to Senator Nickles for the amount of time and effort he has put into all of this. He is very knowledgeable on the substance of the Patients' Bill of Rights issue. There are many Senators on both sides of the aisle who prefer to do this another way. It has taken restraint on both sides. I know Senator Nickles still has concerns about it, but he has been willing to work with us to come up with an agreement to move forward. I know that applies to Senator Kennedy also. I also have to thank Senator Cochran and Senator Kohl, managers of this agriculture appropriations bill, around whose neck this issue has been attached for the last week. They have been very patient and understanding. I hope tomorrow we will be prepared to move forward aggressively on a number of these appropriations bills--the three I mentioned at the top or agriculture or one of the others. I will be talking to the ranking member and Senator Daschle about the appropriations we can move forward with first.

Mr. LOTT. The agreement wouldn't allow for that.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, let me say first Senator Daschle and I have labored long and hard to come to an agreement on a unanimous-consent procedure to deal with the Patients' Bill of Rights issue, appropriations bills, and nominations, and it still takes an awful lot of good faith. We have to work together. We have to have some trust. We have to give the benefit of the doubt to the leaders. Also, in the Senate we have to be prepared to deal with action. We are trying to find a way to deal fairly with the appropriations bills and with the Patients' Bill of Rights. I ask unanimous consent that the majority leader or his designee, introduce the underlying health care bill and it be placed on the calendar by 12 noon on Thursday, July 8, and the bill become the pending business at 1 p.m. on Monday, July 12, 1999, with a vote occurring on final passage at the close of business on Thursday, July 15, and the bill be subject to the following agreement: That the bill be limited to 3 hours of debate, to be equally divided in the usual form, that all amendments in order to the bill be relevant to the subject of amendment Nos. 702, 703, the introduced bill or health care tax cuts, and all first degree amendments be offered in an alternating fashion with Senator Daschle to offer the initial first degree amendment and all first- and second-degree amendments be limited to 100 minutes each, to be equally divided in the usual form. I further ask consent that second-degree amendments be limited to one second- degree amendment per side, per party, with no motions to commit or recommit in order, or any other act with regard to the amendments in order, and that just prior to third reading of the bill, it be in order for the majority leader, or his designee to offer a final amendment, with no second-degree amendments in order. I further ask consent that following passage of the bill, should the bill, upon passage, contain any revenue blue slip matter, the bill remain at the desk and that when the Senate receives the house companion bill, the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration, all after the enacting clause be stricken, and the text of the Senate bill that was passed be inserted in lieu thereof, the bill as amended be passed, the Senate insist on its amendment and request a conference with the House, all without any intervening action or debate.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I extend my appreciation to the distinguished senior Senator from New York. It is always a pleasure to work with him. I thought it was appropriate we have this time this morning to pay tribute to this great man. Mr. President. today, along with other Senators from both sides of the aisle, I note the first anniversary of the death of Rabbi Morris Sherer, the long-time president of Agudath Israel of America. This is a sad memorial, in that the nation has lost his ethical leadership and his commitment to justice and religious liberty. But this should also be a celebratory observance, to honor the memory of a man who, while treasuring the past, always looked forward. Rabbi Sherer was a living example of President Reagan's favorite saying: there's no limit to what you can accomplish when you don't care who gets the credit for it. But today, we rightly give him credit for a lifetime of good works on behalf of this people, his faith, and his country. More than a half-century ago, in the worst of times for European Jewry, he put Agudath Israel in the forefront of assisting the persecuted and saving the hunted. And with the defeat of Nazism, his organization pitched in to help refugees and immigrants. Here at home, he took a small organization that seemed to be on the sidelines of American life and transformed it into an active, weighty, influential factor in the mainstream of national affairs. He was not reluctant to apply the value of his faith of public policy. Because religious education was at the very core of his community's life, he fought for equitable treatment of students in faith-based schools, whether Christian academies or Orthodox schools. Because he understood that a culture without values is a culture without a future, he foutht against the moral decline that has brought so much suffering and sorrow to our country in recent decades. His concern to preserve and strengthen the Jewish religious heritage in American did not prevent him from working with those outside his own community who shared his principles. We need to have more of that in America, not less. In matters of public policy, it is easy to win applause, but it is even harder to win true respect. Rabbi Sherer sidestepped the applause and earned the respect that today brings members of the Senate of the United States to pay tribute to his memory. I know he would be especially pleased by this observance, not because we are here praising him, but because his son, Rabbi Shimshon Sherer, is serving today as our guest Chaplain. We thank him for that, as we thank the men and women of Agudath Israel for their continuing commitment to defend their faith and advance the humane vision of Rabbi Morris Sherer. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, what is the pending business?

Mr. LOTT. I know that makes everybody feel good.

Mr. LOTT. Let me ask you the critical question. For the average person out there--senior citizen who is worried about their health care--they are in an HMO or managed care organization and they have a problem and they want that problem dealt with, this very graphically shows what the problem is with the bill. It winds up that a bureaucrat is involved and a lawyer is involved. What I want to know is, the alternative bill that has been developed by you and Senator Nickles and Senator Collins and Senator Santorum, Dr. Frist, and others, does it provide a way for that patient's problem to be dealt with? Is it a timely issue? Is it dealt with in a way where lawyers are not necessary?

Mr. LOTT. Would the Senator from Texas respond to a couple questions?

Mr. LOTT. This is the Kennedy-care stethoscope you have there demonstrated on that board?

Mr. LOTT. You give the patient that choice. They can choose to go with an MSA account. They can choose the doctor they want. But again, I want to ask the question, what if that person decides to stay in their managed care organization and a problem develops? Under your bill, there is a review process--an internal and external process--that has a specified period of time in which action has to occur; is that correct?

Mr. LOTT. All right, sir. I just wanted to emphasize those points. You always do an excellent job with your cards and even your unusual stethoscope. Let me talk about the issue of where we are. First of all, I think it is very important that we in the Senate act to do the people's business. This time of year, every summer, the Senate is very much involved in passing the annual appropriations bills--the bills that do keep the Government going, bills that have many programs that the administration has asked for and, quite frankly, many programs that the American people rely on. We are going to have four votes this afternoon, trying to bring up four different appropriations bills to try to get the people's business done: the agriculture appropriations bill, the transportation appropriations bill. So many of us in this country depend on an improved transportation infrastructure. I know that is true in my State and a lot of other States. We have dangerous bridges, narrow, two-lane, hilly roads. We have interstate systems that are in disrepair. We have mass transportation systems that need additional systems. All of that is in the transportation appropriations bill, which we hope to have considered in short order by the Senate. We have the Commerce-State-Justice appropriations bill. This is a bill that has to do with everything from fisheries in this country to foreign policy to law enforcement. Certainly, we need to get that bill up. We need to have all three of those bills done before this week is out. Another one is the foreign operations appropriations bill, a bill that has been masterfully put together by the members of the appropriations subcommittee in a bipartisan way, under the leadership of Senator McConnell of Kentucky, a bill that probably could go through here on a voice vote. Yet it appears that these appropriations bills are going to be delayed or obstructed. The one that is presently pending before the Senate, and has been here now for this being the third week, is the agriculture appropriations bill, a bill that is so important to our farmers in America and important to our consumers and to our children and to the poor people in this country. This bill does provide the farm programs, but it also has programs such as food stamps and school lunches and the Women, Infants, and Children Program. It is the one that determines whether or not in many instances the American people get access to the farm products from our farmers, who are the geniuses of the world in terms of production and what they have done in our lifetime to provide quality high protein food. They have done a magnificent job. Right now, they have fallen on somewhat hard times. For the second year in a row now we will see a significant downturn in farm production in terms of money that comes to the farmers. This is being brought about by depressed prices, by the fact that we have not been opening up new markets, the fact that we have let countries block our farm products from China to Japan as well as Europe and get away with it. In the case of Europe, they are systematically ignoring WTO decisions with regard to bananas. Now we have the impending problem with beef. So at a time when our markets are not being expanded and opened up, at a time when prices are depressed, farmers are looking for any sign of hope and encouragement. And yet here we are, for the third week, tangled up with an unrelated issue to agriculture. This is not a small bill. This is $60.7 billion for agriculture in America. There is a strong feeling that there is probably going to be a need for additional disaster assistance. I saw where some States right now are looking at another serious drought. You add that on top of depressed prices, declining markets instead of growing markets, and now a drought on top of that, you have the prescription for a disaster. So we may have to come back and take a look at that later on this year. But farmers need some encouragement right now. They need to know what they can depend on. The schools need to know what they are going to be able to count on in the next school year that begins in August, by the way, not at the beginning of the next fiscal year. They need to know what they are going to be able to count on. So we have had this delay because an agreement can't be reached as to how to bring up the Patients' Bill of Rights. Frankly, for 8 months I have been trying to find a way to do just that. I have offered repeated suggestions--the fairest one of all probably just to have a jump ball and say, OK, we will begin here and at a date certain, after a reasonable period of time, we will be through with it. But we tried all kinds of variations. I read into the Record last week the complete unanimous consent agreement I had suggested on Thursday that would have allowed us to bring it up, would have had a reasonable time for consideration, 2 hours on first-degree amendments, 2 hours on second- degree amendments. I don't know how I could be any fairer. That, too, was rejected. So I have tried repeatedly to make this happen. Add to that that this is a charade. This is a farce. This is not for real. So not only are the farmers being taken advantage of, they are being played with. They are being laughed at. Every Senator knows, men and women, Republican, Democrat, regardless of region, no amendment that is added from the Patients' Bill of Rights to the agriculture appropriations bill will ever see the light of day. It will be sheared like wool from a sheep before it gets to the conference just the other side of the Rotunda. It will not happen--not the Feinstein amendment, not some other amendment, not the Kennedy alternative. It will not be a part of the agriculture appropriations bill and shouldn't be. It is still legislating on an appropriations bill. It is an unrelated, nongermane amendment that is being insisted on by, I think, really a few on the Democratic side of the aisle. So this is a farce, ladies and gentlemen. We should no longer allow the people's business to be shunted aside and delayed and obstructed and held up by this kind of activity. We should treat it for what it is. It is a charade. It is a farce. But it is not a happy one. It is a sad one. I encourage my colleagues today on both sides of the aisle, don't be a part of this. We should summarily dismiss as frivolous these amendments that are being added or offered to be added to this agriculture appropriations bill. Maybe they are substantive. Maybe some of them have merit. But to offer them here, who are we kidding? Nobody, nobody in this room. I think most Americans know this is not a serious effort. Can we work out a way, an agreement to bring this up for a reasonable period of time and still get our work done in terms of the appropriations bills and other legislation that is pending, some of it in conference, some of it waiting to come before the Senate? The bankruptcy reform package is waiting for action. The flag burning constitutional amendment has been passed by the House of Representatives. Yet we are over here tangled up in a procedural activity. I think we should not be a part of that. I am going to insist that we dismiss it and that we move on and get our work done. I really hope and reach out to the leadership on the other side of the aisle and say: Let's see if we can't find a way to deal with this at another time in a way that is fair to all sides. Let's go on and pass these appropriations bills. Several of them that I have not even mentioned here today we could probably move through very quickly, in a limited period of time, with limited amendments, because there are just not going to be a lot of amendments offered, and do some of the other business, including the nominations that we all know should be at least given an opportunity to be considered. I just wanted to lay that marker down and get that word firmly planted in our lexicon. This procedure is a farce. It will not happen. And by the way, just to make sure I was on totally safe ground, it always behooves one to check with the appropriations chairman to make sure he agrees. He agrees. He obviously is offended and upset that his bills out of the Appropriations Committee are being delayed, and he agrees we should not have these legislative matters, these extraneous matters being used to delay very important appropriations bills so that we can get our work done. By the way, the President is out there saying: Let's work together. Great, let's do. I am ready for deeds, not words. I want us to have Medicare reform, but the commission, the bipartisan commission's work was basically rejected. The President didn't allow one of his nominees of the commission to vote for it. Yet we had Democrats and Republicans who were for it. The Finance Committee, I believe, is willing to move forward in a constructive way. If he wants to work on some of these issues, we would certainly be glad to find the time to do it. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, our effort with these cloture votes was to find a way to move the people's business forward. We had four cloture votes on four appropriations bills: one on the agriculture appropriations bill and three on motions to proceed to other bills-- Commerce-Justice-State transportation, and foreign operations appropriations. Obviously, these bills are ready to go. We should make every effort to consider those and/or other bills. I understand the District of Columbia appropriations bill is ready and perhaps Treasury-Postal Service. The Appropriations Committee is doing its work, and its work is stacking up now on our calendar. The business before us is exactly how to proceed with the cloture motion filed on the Kennedy bill, which was offered as a second-degree amendment to the Feinstein amendment. I had suggested we would be willing to do it in the stacked sequence today, but I did not ask consent for that. We need to find some way to move forward on that cloture vote. Rather than waiting until Wednesday, I want us to find a way to have that vote so we can move on to what is to be the outcome of that and whatever follows next.

Mr. LOTT

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

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

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I know this is an important issue to the minority leader. He will be here shortly. If he wishes, I would be willing to go ahead and have this cloture vote occur as the last vote in the voting sequence that we have stacked this afternoon at 5:30, notwithstanding rule XXII. I am not asking for that right now, but I make that offer to our colleagues. We can vote on that cloture motion this afternoon if they wish, or we can do it tomorrow. But at some point, it will ripen, and we will then have a chance to vote on cloture. I suggest that we actually vote on it. At this time, I yield the floor. Mr. DURBIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, again, I did offer the Kennedy health care bill to the agriculture appropriations bill. My thinking is that rather than doing this piecemeal, let's go ahead and deal with the overall Democrat bill dealing with the Patients' Bill of Rights. In order to make sure it is properly considered, I will advocate cloture and I will, in fact, vote for cloture. I think that way we can deal with this issue straight up, not playing around with it. I emphasize again that this is a farce. I am treating it accordingly. When both sides really want to get serious about sitting down and working out a way to consider this bill separately as a legislative vehicle, I will be glad to do that. But it should not continue to tangle up the appropriations bills. I believe Senator Daschle and I really want to get some work done this week for the benefit of the country. I am convinced that he has that intent. By taking this action, I think we can still pass some appropriations bills this week and clear our calendar of a lot of nominations.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with so that I may explain briefly what is in this amendment, and if the Senator from Wisconsin wishes, he can continue the objection. I will clarify it for those who are curious about exactly what that amendment is.

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote occur on the Kennedy health care bill at 12:15 p.m. on Tuesday and the mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote on the Kennedy health care bill occur at 2:15 p.m. on Tuesday and the mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, there is one other option. If we do not get an agreement to handle it sometime tomorrow, we will, of course, handle it in the regular order on Wednesday, either 1 hour after we come in or sometime which the leaders will discuss. I have one more request. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be 1 hour of debate on the pending amendment to be equally divided in the usual form and the vote occur on, or in relation to, the amendment at 11 a.m. on Tuesday.