Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote occur at 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, July 7, and the mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I should note that these appointments are to the Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets. The members will be Senator D'Amato of New York, Senator Specter of Pennsylvania, Senator Boxer of California, and Senator Dodd of Connecticut.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to vitiate the title amendment to H.R. 3616.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of calendar No. 383, S. 2073.

Mr. LOTT. This is to authorize appropriations for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Amendments Nos. 3047 and 3048, en bloc

Mr. LOTT. There are two amendments at the desk; an amendment offered by Senators Hatch and Feingold and DeWine; and an amendment offered by Senators Leahy and Hatch. I ask unanimous consent that the amendments be considered, en bloc.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendments be agreed to, en bloc, the committee amendment be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be considered read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill appear at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Senator Coverdell has a substitute amendment at the desk, and I ask for its consideration.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Con. Res. 81, and further that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk due for its second reading.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I want to express my appreciation to the fine men and women of the United States Air Force, who honored my great state and her great people by naming the 19th operational B-2 Stealth Bomber, The Spirit of Mississippi. I saw the B-2 fly--and it filled me, and all those who participated in the naming ceremony, with enormous pride. The dedication of this magnificent aircraft took place in a moving ceremony on Saturday, May 23rd, in Jackson, Mississippi. The ceremony took on additional meaning for all those who joined me since it came at the start of the Memorial Day weekend, when we honor those who sacrificed so much for the defense of our great nation. The ceremony included a number of great Americans. General Richard Hawley, the Commander of the Air Force's Air Combat Command, chose Mississippi as the name to grace this aircraft as she serves to deter our enemies for decades to come. Also participating in the ceremony was Mr. Kent Kresa, the Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of Northrop Grumman, the company that built this technological wonder with the help of the skilled people and companies of Mississippi. I was pleased to be joined by a number of senior political leaders from Mississippi: My esteemed colleague, Senator Thad Cochran, Governor Kirk Fordice, and Congressman Roger Wicker of the 1st District. Major General James H. Garner, the Adjutant General of the Mississippi National Guard, and Colonel Robert Barron, the Commander of the 172nd Airlift Wing at Jackson, served as our hosts for these ceremonies. When you stand up close to a B-2, and have the opportunity to see a B-2 fly, you realize just how magnificent this aircraft truly is--and the magnitude of the technological accomplishments that it represents. Just to put this in perspective, the B-2 aircraft has a wingspan about \2/3\ the length of a football field and, so they tell me, the radar signature of an insect. With refueling, it can fly anywhere on the planet to deliver 16 one-ton precision-guided bombs--even in bad weather. The B-2 offers a revolutionary combination of stealth, range, payload, and precision. It could only have been built here in America-- and, I say with pride, only with the help of my fellow Mississippians. Fielding this revolutionary aircraft took courage and dedication on the part of key leaders in the Senate, the House of Representatives, and four separate Administrations. To get where we are today, from concept to a squadron of B-2s ready to fly and fight, took almost two decades of effort. Standing here now, we can better appreciate their vision. And we need to remember the time it took to develop the B-2 as we look to the future of America's long-range bomber force. We in Congress believe that long-range air power will be even more important in the future than it has been in the past. The reasons are straightforward. Our forces based overseas are shrinking in size--and that trend is likely to continue. Potential adversaries are arming themselves with fast-moving conventional forces and weapons of mass destruction. Long range air power gives the President the ability to respond to aggression immediately and decisively--and that's what helps provide deterrence. We in Congress, however, have had growing concerns about the future of the bomber force. Accordingly, we mandated last year that a distinguished and independent panel of experts--the Long Range Air Power Panel--examine current plans for the bomber force and recommend actions to the President and the Congress. That panel has completed its review and I'd like to briefly share some of its important recommendations regarding the B-2 and the future of America's long- range bomber force. The Panel stated up front that, and I quote: ``long-range air power is an increasingly important element of U.S. military capability.'' Over the near term, to make sure that the bomber force can meet the increasing demand for long-range air power, the Panel recommended that we need to invest in and upgrade the current force. In the case of the B-2, for example, the Panel stated that we should work on in increasing the B-2's sortie rate using a combined program that improves stealth maintenance and performance. This will take some additional funding beyond what we provided in the 1998 budget, but keep in mind that doubling the B-2's sortie rate would in effect double the combat power of the force. That's a bargain. The Panel also made an important recommendation regarding the long- term future of the bomber force. As I noted before, it took almost 20 years to field the B-2. In less than twenty years from now, the Panel stated that we should be fielding a next generation bomber--and to do so, we need to get started now to develop a plan to replace the existing force over time. I don't know what the next generation bomber will look like. Maybe it will be an upgraded B-2 or something completely different. But I do know that given the strategic importance of long-range air power, we need to get started. I look forward to seeing the Pentagon's recommendations next year about this important issue. The enhancements suggested for the B-2 are in line with the requirements identified by my fellow participant in the Spirit of Mississippi naming ceremony, General Hawley. As we complete work on this year's defense budget, we should follow the example offered by a brilliant former leader from Mississippi--the late Senator John Stennis--who along with other leaders in this chamber had the vision to start building the B-2. His vision is now a reality that will fly for many decades into the future. In following Senator Stennis' guidance, we need to support the continued enhancement of the revolutionary B-2 stealth bomber. And we need to encourage the Air Force to provide us with a comprehensive plan for developing a next-generation bomber to sustain the long-range air power force over the long-term. John Stennis would be very proud of our actions--and our long-term vision.

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, Senator Daschle and I have been talking about a task force to consider the question of economic sanctions, how they are put in place, how they are dealt with, both in the short term and over the long term. We have discussed this matter with Secretary of State Albright. I think there is feeling on both sides of the aisle that perhaps the proclivity to place sanctions, economic sanctions on countries around the world repeatedly, and with not a clear way of ending those, has become a problem, at least one we should think very carefully about to see if there is a way we can deal with some of the pending legislation in this area, like, for instance, the Glenn amendment that was applicable in the case of India and, I believe, Pakistan with the Pressler amendment, and a number of other instances. On the longer term, I think we need to have a task force to give thought, how we do this, when we do it, and even when we end it. I have discussed it with a number of Senators on our side of the aisle who work in this area of foreign policy and deal with the question of sanctions, and so I am satisfied we can have a good group and this will be a bipartisan group. So I want to announce we are agreeing to create a task force on economic sanctions to examine this whole area. I wanted to have a short-term mandate, though, not just the broader policy questions, but to examine what we can do or what should be done about sanctions on India and Pakistan as a result of their nuclear programs. With the recent stories of nuclear tests in south Asia, it is important to look at the U.S. sanctions laws and how they affect our ability to de-escalate the nuclear arms race in the region. I have asked the task force to make recommendations to the Senate leadership by July 15, 1998, on sanctions relating to these two countries--India and Pakistan. We will also ask this task force to examine overall issues related to sanctions, legislation, and implementation. I have asked the task force to report back to the Senate leadership by September 1, 1998, on the following issues: What constitutes a sanction? There are many categories of legislative and executive branch action, using economic sanctions in an effort to support policy goals, including restrictions on U.S. Government funds, conditions on the export of sensitive technology, and limitations on normal commercial activity. What sanctions are now in place? And what flexibility is provided in these different sanctions? That would be a second question. Third: How should success be assessed in determining the effectiveness of these sanctions? When have we done what we wanted to achieve, and then can perhaps remove them? Fourth: How should policy goals be defined in considering and implementing these sanctions? Are effective procedures in place now to ensure coordination between the executive and legislative branches for the consideration and imposition of sanctions? I have to say, I think the answer to that question is no; there is not adequate coordination and communication between the executive and legislative branches in this area of sanctions. Are effective procedures in place for oversight and monitoring of the executive branch compliance and implementation of existing sanctions? I have been stunned by some of the instances that I have seen with regard to Russia and with China where clearly sanctions were called for, should have been almost automatic by the administration, and it did not happen. Why not? And so we need to think about that. Should there be a unique Senate floor or committee procedure for considering sanctions legislation? Answering all of these questions in the limited timeframe will not be easy, but I am confident this very distinguished and qualified bipartisan group can come up with some very good recommendations. And I hope that the Senate will reserve its judgment and not act in this area until we see what will come out of the task force recommendations. The task force will include 18 Members and will be chaired by the distinguished Senator from Kentucky, Senator McConnell. He is chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations. The cochair will be Senator Biden. The task force will also include Senators Helms, Baucus, Lugar, Dodd, D'Amato, Glenn, Mack, Kerry, Kyl, Leahy, Warner, Levin, Hutchinson, Lieberman, Roberts, and Moynihan. I think you can see this is a very distinguished group. And I know they will have some very important recommendations to the Senate. I will be glad to yield to the Senator from Kentucky.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Again, Mr. President, I should note that if we could have gotten that agreement, since it has already passed the House, this bill would have gone directly to the President for his signature. It passed the House April 29th by a vote of 287 to 140. I would think that this is something we would want to do. I think for the Federal Government to be distributing needles encourages people to use needles for drug abuse, and I had hoped we could get it cleared. We had worked earlier to try to get some sort of agreement on how we could clear it, with maybe even some amendments being ordered. We could not do it. Also, in order to get the President's signature, we would have to do it in this way.

Mr. LOTT. I now ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate now turn to Calendar No. 361, H.R. 3717, prohibiting Federal funds for the distribution of needles; that there be 30 minutes for debate to be equally divided with no amendments or motions in order. I further ask that following the conclusion or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to third reading and final passage, all without intervening action or debate, and finally I ask unanimous consent it be in order for me to ask for the yeas and nays on passage at this time.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I understand that. I know every individual Senator can demand his or her right to offer amendments. But I would have to say, I am very concerned that the Senate is getting more and more into a position where we try to rewrite or write bills on the floor of the Senate. One of the basic tenets I was told about when I came over to the Senate is, if you have a bad bill, don't think you are going to fix it on the floor of the Senate. When you have something like a drug czar reauthorization--I know there are a lot of drug-related amendments that are sort of pent up and Members want to offer them, but it seems to me we ought to just reauthorize that office--it is not a big, complicated bill--and allow the drug czar to do his job. But we will keep working and hopefully find a way to get a limited amount of time and limited amendments on that issue.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I do.

Mr. LOTT. You never said you object to it, then, as proposed. So you object to it as proposed?

Mr. LOTT. I believe, Mr. President, then, the Senator objects to the original request?

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I would have to object to that at this time because if we add any amendments to this bill in its present form, then it would require further House action. And, of course, the House has already adjourned for the July 4 recess until July 14. I note also, if we do not do this bill now in the form that it was called up, the money that would have been used for this Reading Excellence Program, some $206 million, I believe it was --something of that nature--would then go over to the IDEA, Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, so that money would be gone. So we really are in a box here. I think everybody would like to do the Reading Excellence Act. But if we don't do it in the form that I have called it up, it would have to go back to the House. Basically, then, we wouldn't get anything done. We need to send it directly to the President. So that is why I would be constrained to object to that modification.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment under the provisions of S. Con. Res. 297. I further ask that when the Senate reconvenes on Monday, July 6 at 12 noon, immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted and the Senate then begin a period of morning business until 1 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 5 minutes each with the following exceptions: Senator Lieberman, 30 minutes; Senator Lott, or his designee, 30 minutes.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask that the Senate stand in adjournment under the provisions of H. Con. Res 297, following the remarks of Senator Gorton of Washington. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. For the information of all Senators, when the Senate reconvenes on Monday, July 6, at 12 noon, there will be a period for morning business until 1. Following morning business, it will be my intention for the Senate to begin consideration of the VA/HUD Appropriations bill. I had earlier indicated that we might go directly to the Department of Defense Appropriations bill, but one of the managers will be necessarily absent. So we will go to the VA/HUD appropriations bill. It is hoped that Members will come to the floor during Monday's session to offer and debate amendments to the VA/HUD bill. We need to get a number of appropriations bills done in July, and if we could get this one done, working on Monday and Tuesday of that week--certainly not more than Thursday--that would be helpful. There will be no votes, though, during Monday's session. Any votes ordered with respect to the VA/HUD Appropriations bill will be postponed to occur on Tuesday, July 7, at a time to be determined by the two leaders. A cloture motion was filed on the motion to proceed to the products liability bill, with a vote to occur Tuesday morning at 9:30 a.m. Also, on Tuesday evening, the Senate may vote on the IRS reform conference report. When I say Tuesday evening, I mean probably night. Finally, I remind all Members that July will be a very busy month. We will have late night sessions during each week. We should expect to have votes on most Mondays and Fridays. The cooperation of all Members will be necessary for us to complete our work prior to the August recess.