Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I amend that request to include 15 minutes for Senator Kennedy on Monday morning, also.

Mr. LOTT. No.

Mr. LOTT. Thank you very much.

Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT. Why don't I just ask for 15 minutes every morning for Senator Kennedy for the remainder of the year.

Mr. LOTT. I certainly will. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Dorgan have 15 minutes in morning business as well on Monday, October 12.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that morning business be extended until 3 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each for debate only with no motions in order, and at 3 p.m. the Senate automatically stand in recess under the previous order. I further ask that during morning business the following Senators be recognized: Senator John Kerry for 15 minutes, Senator Daschle for 30 minutes, Senator Kennedy for 20 minutes, Senator Enzi, Senator Kempthorne, Senator Grams for 20 minutes, and Senator Domenici for 20 minutes.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I want to take this time to recognize the important role and work of the Senate's Subcommittee on Communications this Congress and emphasize the challenges that lie ahead. The communications world encompasses so many areas that personally touch the lives of practically every person in America--from the telephone to the television to the computer. The ways we interact is a fitting reflection of the fast times in which we live and the constant evolution of technologies. Traditional systems are changing. Options are expanding. Companies continue to shift gears and take the necessary risks to bring fruition of the landmark 1996 Telecommunications Act to the marketplace and to consumers. Enacting policies to encourage, and not hinder, such activity is Congress' challenge. Mr. President, I believe the members of this subcommittee are ready and willing to embrace that challenge. I want to express my sincere gratitude to my colleague and friend, Senator Conrad Burns of Montana, for his yeoman's work as chairman of the subcommittee during the course of this Congress. His guidance has been instrumental in bringing focus to the many issues that merit attention. His inclusive and enthusiastic approach has engaged all who work with him, and I appreciate that. Mr. President, many contentious policy areas were considered by the subcommittee during the 105th, and consensus proved elusive. I am confident, though, that the stage has been set for several productive debates in the first session of the 106th--from Federal Communications Commission reauthorization, to international satellite privatization, to transition to digital, to competition issues, to Internet privacy and content. Speaking of the Internet, let me take this opportunity to mention my deep admiration for the contributions made by retiring Senator Dan Coats in this area. Although not a member of the Commerce Committee, he has tirelessly advocated against the Internet becoming a dirty book for our children, while responsibly taking into account first amendment concerns. I have the utmost respect for his efforts, and will truly miss his wisdom and his counsel. Mr. President, I appreciate the contributions of each of my subcommittee colleagues this Congress, and look forward to working with them next year in tackling some tough issues and ushering in a truly new era of communications.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Yes, that is correct. A vehicle that would qualify as a nonrepairable or as salvage vehicle cannot be taken apart for its parts before appropriate ownership documentation has been received for that vehicle. Mr. President, I appreciate that the Senator from Colorado has taken the time to address this important issue.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, one of our country's most important observances is National Bible Week sponsored by the National Bible Association. This year, as in the past, it will be observed by houses of worship and individuals of all faiths during the week in which Thanksgiving Day falls. That will be from Sunday, November 22 through Sunday, November 29. It is my great and underserved honor to be this year's congressional co-chair of that observance. In that capacity, I would like to recommend to all my colleagues, and to the American people, that, in this season of strife and division we look to National Bible Week as an opportunity to join together in prayerful reflection. The German poet Heinrich Heine called the Bible ``that great medicine chest of humanity,'' the greatest cure for the worst ills of mankind. And he observed how--during the great fire that destroyed the Second Temple of ancient Israel--the Jewish people rushed to save, not the gold and silver vessels of sacrifice, not the bejeweled breastplate of the High Priest, but their Scriptures. For the Word of God was the greatest treasure they had. It remains our greatest treasure today. The lessons it teaches, and the morality it commands, are the foundation on which a free people build self-government. In that sense, the Bible is the charter of our liberties. Daniel Webster put it this way: ``If we abide by the principles taught by the Bible, our country will go on prospering.'' That has never been a partisan sentiment, and neither should it be so today. Two great political rivals of the early twentieth century, both of whom achieved the Presidency and attained world leadership, agreed on this one point. Teddy Roosevelt said, ``A thorough knowledge of the Bible is worth more than a college education.'' And Woodrow Wilson, a university president at Princeton before reaching the White House, counselled, ``When you have read the Bible, you will know it is the word of God, because you will have found in it the key to your own heart, your own happiness and your own duty.'' Here in the Senate, as in the House of Representatives, there are several small Bible study groups. Members of all faiths regularly come together, away from the public spotlight, to learn from one another and seek inspiration from sacred Scripture. For my part, I find in those sessions both enlightenment and challenge. For any time we read the Bible with an open heart, we may find ourselves falling short, in some way, of the standard it sets for us and the promise it offers us. In that way, reading the Bible can be like a spiritual work-out. And if, in the process, we feel the spiritual equivalent of a few sore muscles, we can remember the saying, ``No pain, no gain.'' And the gain that Scripture offers lasts a lifetime--and even longer. For that reason, it is especially appropriate that Thanksgiving Day comes during National Bible Week, for the Bible itself is something for which we should give thanks, on that day and every day.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I believe I still have the time. If the Senator from Arkansas would like a couple of minutes, I would be glad to yield to him for a comment.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, this resolution concerns a request for testimony in a civil action set for trial in the U.S. District Court for District of Idaho. This case arises out of a dispute between the plaintiff, a private corporation, and the Department of Education concerning the status of certain student loan guaranty reserve funds. Counsel for the plaintiff wishes to question a former member of Senator Craig's staff about her recollection of meetings with representatives from the Department of Education during a time period in which she served as a legislative aid to the Senator. This resolution would authorize testimony by the former staff member, and any other former or current employees of the Senate, except where a privilege should be asserted, with representation by the Senate Legal Counsel. The resolution would also authorize the Senate Legal Counsel to represent Senator Craig and his employees in connection with this matter in order to protect the Senator's privileges.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the White House recently announced that it would allow some relaxation of its encryption export controls to allow the sale of strong encryption products to companies in the finance, insurance, and health sectors and to certain companies engaged in electronic commerce. While the specific details have yet to be articulated in revised regulations, it appears that the Administration is finally heeding Congress' calls to modernize its export control regulations. While this action is a step in the right direction, I believe the Administration is still moving too slowly and incrementally. Even with these proposed changes, there are still a number of other businesses and consumers who will not be able to utilize strong American-made encryption products. Since export restrictions will remain in place, foreign suppliers will continue to develop and sell strong encryption products in the international marketplace without real competition from U.S. providers. Putting $60 billion and over 200,000 American jobs in jeopardy over the next few years. Unfortunately, the Administration continues to pursue an outmoded policy that supports the broad use of 56-bit encryption for the vast majority of computer users. As my colleagues are aware, the government- approved 56-bit Data Encryption Standard was recently cracked last July in just 56 hours. This is particularly alarming because it was accomplished using a single computer instead of the thousands that were linked together just a few months ago to achieve the same result in 39 days. Fortunately, this code-breaking effort was undertaken by contest participants as part of an international challenge instead of by hackers or thieves preying on a vulnerable, unsuspecting target. It is truly scary to see how easy it is for someone's medical, financial, or personal records to be accessed and read by unauthorized persons. Ironically, the decoded message read, ``It's time for those 128-, 192-, and 256-bit keys.'' This feat proves what many in Congress have been stating for some time, that 56-bit encryption can no longer protect individual or corporate computer files from unauthorized access. Yet, 56- bit encryption continues to be recognized as the government standard and U.S. companies can only sell advanced encryption software and hardware to a finite community abroad. Let us be clear; the Administration's export regime affects American citizens everywhere. Whether you communicate via the Internet, or work in the technology business, you are likely to be adversely affected by the Administration's current encryption policy. A policy that does not allow the sale of strong encryption to energy suppliers, telecommunication providers, the transportation industry, human rights organizations and the vast majority of legitimate and responsible business entities and consumers throughout the globe. Ultimately, this approach promotes the use and development of weak encryption. While I welcome the White House's recent announcement to relax some export controls, the Administration's proposal simply does not go far enough. Mr. President, it is encouraging that the Minority Leader has actively engaged himself on the encryption issue. In a floor speech last July, Senator Daschle agreed that America's encryption policy needs to strike a balance between privacy protections and national security and law enforcement interests. The Minority Leader recognizes that the development and use of strong encryption products promote international commerce and Internet use as well as ensure privacy and aid national security. Senator Daschle is also equally alarmed that, ``maintaining existing encryption policies will cost the U.S. economy as much as $96 billion over the next 5 years . . .'' I agree with Senator Daschle's comments that the Administration needs to articulate and advance an encryption agreement that is ``good for consumers, good for business, and good for law enforcement and national security.'' Similarly, we agree that it is time to move beyond endless discussion and debate and on to a balanced and complete solution. Mr. President, with every passing month, consumers across the globe turn to foreign suppliers for their advanced encryption needs. If a solution that reverses this trend is not found soon, then America's computer industry will fall so far behind its foreign competitors that U.S. suppliers will lose forever their technology market share to European, Asian, and other foreign manufacturers. Congress and the Administration cannot allow this happen. As Senator Daschle pointed out, the computer industry and privacy groups are serious about reaching a compromise on encryption. In May, for example, Americans for Computer Privacy (ACP), a technology policy group, submitted a seven-point proposal to the Administration which would provide U.S. manufactures the ability to sell the kind of encryption technology that is already widely available abroad. In July, an industry consortium announced the ``Private Doorbells'' proposal to assist law enforcement. This proposal was a reasonable attempt to find an alternative to the White House`s call for a national key escrow framework. Fortunately, the Administration finally appears to recognize that a third party key recovery system is technically unworkable and unnecessary. I believe Congress is still interested in modernizing the Nation's encryption policy based on current realities. As Senator Daschle observed, several cryptography bills have been offered during this session. Clearly though, they are not all created equal. Some of these legislative proposals would turn back the clock by putting controls on domestic encryption where no such controls currently exist. Others would completely sacrifice constitutional protections by allowing law enforcement to read personal computer files without a court order and without the target ever knowing their files had been accessed. There are also proposals that would require an expensive, technically unworkable key escrow system. Finally, some members advocate linking encryption with other technology issues which could in the end result in no legislation being passed at all. The encryption debate cannot be resolved by settling on a specific bit-length, giving particular industry sectors export relief while denying others the same, or by sanctioning one technical solution over another. Moreover, this debate will not be resolved by building secret backdoors, frontdoors or any doorways into encryption software. Mr. President, I look forward to working further with Senator Daschle, my colleagues from both sides of the aisle, the Administration, and the computer industry to help close the gaps that still exist. As the Minority Leader recognizes, this is not about politics or partisanship. This is an urgent matter that requires us all to work together to forge an appropriate solution. One that balances the needs of industry, consumers, and the law enforcement and intelligence communities. In the end, we must have a consensus solution that brings America encryption policy into the 21st Century.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, while our colleagues express their appreciation to our good friend from Indiana, I would like to just say a few words about him and spread those on the Record of the U.S. Senate. We are all losing some good friends in the Senate Chamber this year on both sides of the aisle, and we will have a chance over the next few hours to talk about each one of them. I want to say a few special words about my good friend, Dan Coats. Senator Dan Coats succeeded Senator Dan Quayle in the Senate. He was a Member of the House, and he worked as a staff member before that. I have actually known this distinguished Senator from Indiana going back about 20 years now, as a staff member, which I was, as a Congressman, and as a Senator. I have to say that I truly believe that no man or woman who serves in the Senate today has had a greater influence on my own life and on my own career than Dan Coats from Indiana. He was always there for me when I sought advice in the House. And every time I have sought elective office in the Senate, he was one of the nominators. I referred to him as my ``rabbit's foot'' because he always said just the right things. Whenever the going is the toughest, I know I can go to Dan and seek good advice, and it will come from him. He is a man that has his priorities in order--honesty, integrity, family, and also those special things a lot of people don't know about, such as his involvement in the Big Brothers Program. One of the things he enjoyed the most, which he didn't mention today, is that he served in the House for quite some time as the ranking member on the Select Committee on Children, Youth and Families. He enjoyed that assignment. I always wanted to eliminate all of the select committees. But for Dan and that committee, they did a great service for the families and the children of this country. Dan is the kind of guy also who will run late to a meeting with the archbishop and will stop and visit with a homeless man on the street to try to talk to him about his needs, and try to help him, try to get him to go to a shelter. He is really a good human being. He has been a valuable asset to the Senate when it came to our services, when it came to working with any of us who have problems here in the Senate. So I am going to dearly miss him as a personal friend, as a great Senator, a great family man. He and Marcia are great people. In fact, I was sitting on my patio a couple of weeks ago on Saturday, and I got to thinking about Dan Coats. I got melancholy, and I got tears in my eyes. I called him on a Saturday afternoon and said, ``You can't leave. I can't go forward in the Senate without you.'' I found out that he and Marcia had been playing tennis on a nice clay tennis court instead of being out campaigning in the backwoods somewhere. And, somehow or other, it seemed okay. He is leaving the Senate, but he is not leaving us. I have a feeling that he is going to have a real influence in many ways for the rest of his life, and he is going to stay close to all of us. So on a very personal basis on behalf of the Senate, I wish you God's grace in everything you do, Dan Coats. I yield the floor. Mrs. HUTCHISON addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I appreciate the notification that the Senator was going to make this request. We have not had a chance to look at this legislation. I know there is interest in this area. I think next year we are going to have to do some work on it, and maybe we will even have some legislation in this area. But in view of the hour and the fact that we haven't had a chance really to review it, and the committee hasn't had a chance to act on it, I object at this time.

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 6 p.m. this evening the vote on this motion take place. And between now and then, of course, we have other business we can do. Senator Durbin may want to make some remarks during that time.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I had a conversation with the distinguished Senator from Illinois with regard to his concerns on the bankruptcy reform package as it now exists. He agrees and we agree that there is no necessity for this to be read over a period of 5 or 6 hours. So I think we have something worked out that we will be comfortable with and others will be comfortable with to allow us to assure Members what time the next vote will be, and we can do some business in the interim and have speeches made on this or other issues in the meantime.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to thank the Senator from Alabama and the Chairman of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Subcommittee for their diligent efforts to develop legislation that will provide the public with access to federally funded research data. The Conference Report for the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for FY 99 currently before us requires the Director of OMB to amend OMB Circular A-110 to require Federal awarding agencies to ensure that all research results, including underlying research data, funded by the Federal government are made available to the public through the procedures established under the Freedom of Information Act. This provision represents a critical step forward in assuring that the public has access to the research and underlying data used by the Federal government in developing policy and rules.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes at this time to the chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Campbell. I thank him for his work on this bill. He has worked very hard. The problems we have were not caused by him, but by difficulties in the House of Representatives. I thank the Senator for the effort that he put into this legislation. We will get it done before the day is done--maybe not this day, but before the day is done.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, only the distinguished Senator Byrd would be able to come to the floor and have poetry that he could quote on the spur of the moment. I always enjoy his remarks so much. Thank you, Senator Byrd.

Mr. LOTT. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Mr. LOTT. Thank you, sir.

Mr. LOTT. I am delighted to yield to Senator Byrd.