Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I rise today out of concern for our nation's computer and electronic industries. As you are well aware, the Administration's export policies prohibit American companies from selling state-of-the- art encryption technology abroad without recovery keys and back door access. Encryption is a series of mathematical formulas that scramble and unscramble data and communications. It is used to thwart computer hackers, industrial and foreign espionage agents, and criminals from gaining access to and reading sensitive personal, business, and military communications. The higher the bit-key length, the more difficult it is for unauthorized persons to break the code. Technically advanced encryption ensures that an individual's medical, financial, business, personal records and electronic-mail cannot be accessed without their consent. The Administration is now promoting the deployment of recovery keys so designated third parties would be able to access and share with law enforcement the computer data and communications of American citizens without their knowledge. Currently, government mandated key escrow is not required and is opposed by the computer industry, privacy advocates, legal scholars, and by many members of Congress.

Mr. LOTT. That's right. In fact, a recent survey conducted by Trusted Information Systems found that hundreds of foreign companies sell over 600 encryption products from 29 countries. It is even possible to download some of the strongest technology available, 128-bit key length encryption, off of the Internet. Clearly, America's policy of restricting the sale of American encryption software and hardware has not impacted the availability and use of this technology throughout the globe. No one disputes the fact that the development and use of robust encryption worldwide will continue with or without U.S. business participation. What is particularly disturbing to me is that export controls, instead of achieving their intended purpose, have only served to deny America's premier computer industry the opportunity to compete on a level playing field with foreign competitors. Costing our economy and our nation billions of dollars and the loss of countless American jobs in the process. Given the wide availability of encryption technology, continuing to restrict U.S. access to foreign markets makes no sense.

Mr. LOTT. Even though advanced encryption products are widely available across the globe, the White House continues to stall Congressional and industry attempts to reach a sensible market oriented solution to the nation's outdated encryption export regime. This stonewalling tactic will only cede even more of our nation's technology market to foreign competitors and America will lose forever its ability to sell encryption technology at home and abroad. It is time to change America's export policy before it is too late. If the Administration will not do what is right, reform its export regime, then Congress must enact encryption reform during this session.

Mr. LOTT. Even though a national recovery system would be technically unfeasible, costly, and violates an individual's privacy rights, the Administration continues to require key escrow as a precondition for relaxing America's encryption policy. Again, Mr. President, I would point out that state-of-the-art encryption is available in the international marketplace without key recovery and without backdoor access. This backdoor door requirement is simply backward thinking policy. It does not make sense to hold the computer industry hostage to force the creation of such an unworkable system.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. So everyone is clear, the cloture vote will occur at 5:15. Following that vote, if not invoked, the Senate will proceed--well, will have 10 minutes equally divided, and then proceed to the second vote on the motion to waive the Budget Act to allow Senator Stevens and somebody on your side, some designee on your side, to speak on the particular budget point of order. Therefore, there would be then two back-to-back votes at 5:15, with the 10-minute interval between those two votes.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, would the Senator yield on that point, because I would like to commend her for some efforts in which she has been involved?

Mr. LOTT. As a matter of fact, Mr. President, the motion has to be filed to get a vote on the cloture process. It doesn't mean that you will vote for cloture, and I don't want any inference to be made here that this is unusual. This is, as Senators on both sides know, done quite often by majority leaders, that they file cloture and on occasion vote against that cloture. So this is just a process to get us to a vote, to see where the Senate is, to see if the Senate is ready to cut off debate, and there is nothing unusual about that at all.

Mr. LOTT. ``For these programs under the strictures of the budget agreement we had just last year.'' The Washington Post outlined it pretty clearly today. It is going to be tough to get the appropriations bills done, to get a budget done this year because of the constraints that we agreed to. This bill violates the Budget Act in several instances, I think about six different points. At least one of them we are pointing out here today. That is all it means, that you don't want to waive the Budget Act, that we have agreed to pass this bill that started out well- intentioned, but has grown like top seed to the point where we have to decide whether we want to take this cup from our lips and move on or not.

Mr. LOTT. I think that would be the way to do it.

Mr. LOTT. I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Idaho.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that following the cloture vote, if not invoked, Senator Stevens be recognized to raise a Budget Act point of order, and that the Democratic leader, or his designee, be immediately recognized to make a motion that it be waived, and that that vote occur immediately following the earlier vote without any intervening action or debate.

Mr. LOTT. Would you yield, because I would like to respond to what you are saying there?

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senate Minority Leader Daschle, in introducing legislation which removes an unintended yet troublesome legal obstacle to recycling. It is not a widely known fact that Superfund is biased against recycling. I am confident that the authors of the statute did not intend to favor new materials over those that have been recycled, but we now live with this unintended consequence. Mr. President, our bill corrects current law and encourages recycling. It simply recognizes that recycling is not disposal and that recyclables are not wastes. Common sense tells us that recycling something is not the same as disposing of it. Nonetheless, Mr. President, those who sell materials for recycling are being pulled into Superfund cleanups because, under the law, selling recyclable materials is equivalent to ``arranging for disposal.'' Our bill waives Superfund liability for those who are legitimately recycling these goods. Clearly, recycling is not disposal--it is the opposite. The Superfund Recycling Equity Act is necessary to correct Superfund's fundamental bias against recycled materials. Under current law, recyclable materials, such as paper, glass, plastic, metals and textiles cannot be competitive with new materials. This bill will help level the playing field between the use of recycled goods and competitive virgin raw materials. Currently, suppliers of virgin raw materials face no Superfund liability for contamination caused by their customer. This bill would provide the same waiver to those who sell recyclable materials. Mr. President, this bill also contains protections to ensure that sham recyclers are unable to benefit from this exemption. In order for recyclers to be relieved of Superfund liability, they must act in an environmentally sound manner and sell their product to manufacturers with environmentally responsible business practices. Considering that most recyclers are currently operating in a reasonable and conscience manner, this should be an easy test. Mr. President, the Superfund Recycling Equity Act is the product of lengthy negotiations between the federal and state governments, the environmental community and the scrap recycling industry. These negotiations have resulted in a bill that I believe to be both environmentally and fiscally sound. Americans nationwide have embraced the benefits of recycling. We know that increased recycling means the more efficient use of our natural resources. By removing the threat of Superfund liability for recyclers, we will encourage more recycling. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will lend their support to this targeted and much-needed reform bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to join my colleague, Senate Minority Leader Daschle, in introducing legislation which removes an unintended yet troublesome legal obstacle to recycling. It is not a widely known fact that Superfund is biased against recycling. I am confident that the authors of the statute did not intend to favor new materials over those that have been recycled, but we now live with this unintended consequence. Mr. President, our bill corrects current law and encourages recycling. It simply recognizes that recycling is not disposal and that recyclables are not wastes. Common sense tells us that recycling something is not the same as disposing of it. Nonetheless, Mr. President, those who sell materials for recycling are being pulled into Superfund cleanups because, under the law, selling recyclable materials is equivalent to ``arranging for disposal.'' Our bill waives Superfund liability for those who are legitimately recycling these goods. Clearly, recycling is not disposal--it is the opposite. The Superfund Recycling Equity Act is necessary to correct Superfund's fundamental bias against recycled materials. Under current law, recyclable materials, such as paper, glass, plastic, metals and textiles cannot be competitive with new materials. This bill will help level the playing field between the use of recycled goods and competitive virgin raw materials. Currently, suppliers of virgin raw materials face no Superfund liability for contamination caused by their customer. This bill would provide the same waiver to those who sell recyclable materials. Mr. President, this bill also contains protections to ensure that sham recyclers are unable to benefit from this exemption. In order for recyclers to be relieved of Superfund liability, they must act in an environmentally sound manner and sell their product to manufacturers with environmentally responsible business practices. Considering that most recyclers are currently operating in a reasonable and conscience manner, this should be an easy test. Mr. President, the Superfund Recycling Equity Act is the product of lengthy negotiations between the federal and state governments, the environmental community and the scrap recycling industry. These negotiations have resulted in a bill that I believe to be both environmentally and fiscally sound. Americans nationwide have embraced the benefits of recycling. We know that increased recycling means the more efficient use of our natural resources. By removing the threat of Superfund liability for recyclers, we will encourage more recycling. I hope that my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will lend their support to this targeted and much-needed reform bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, if they would go ahead and be seated if they are in the Chamber--I note that there are a number of our colleagues who are still not here--we will go into a quorum call momentarily to allow Senators to reach the Chamber and be seated. Also, those who are here, I want to note that the camera is located in this corner over to your right. So I ask that all Senators turn their chairs toward the camera. We need to be able to see the camera. The photographer will then take eight pictures, so there will be eight flashes. Once we get started, it should not take very long. But it would be helpful if the Senators who are in the Chamber would take their seats so that when the others arrive we will be able to go straight to the pictures. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if all Senators would take their seats, we could get a more accurate count of who might be absent. I also want to note once again, as I did earlier, the camera that will be taking the picture is over my right shoulder here in the corner. If both sides of the aisle would adjust chairs where you can see the camera, we could get a good shot. The photographer will take 8 pictures with 8 flashes. Once we get all Senators in their chairs, it shouldn't take but just a few minutes to get that done. After the photograph is taken, we will go, I believe immediately without any intervening debate, to a vote on the Gorton amendment. Then we will go to the next Democrat amendment. Those of you that are due to be at a bill signing ceremony about 3 o'clock should be able to make it. If all Senators would take their seats we should be ready to go momentarily. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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, have the yeas and nays been ordered?

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess subject to the call of the Chair.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I wish to take this opportunity to recognize and say farewell to an outstanding Naval Officer, Lieutenant Commander Gary Mayes, who has served with distinction for the past two years in the Navy's Senate Liaison Office. It is a privilege for me to recognize his many outstanding achievements and to commend him for the superb service he has provided this legislative body, the Navy and our great Nation. Lieutenant Commander Mayes is a graduate of Purdue University and was commissioned an Ensign upon graduation from Aviation Officer Candidate School in Pensacola, Florida, in May 1988. He proceeded to flight training where he received his ``Wings of Gold'' and was designated a Naval Aviator in October 1989. Lieutenant Commander Mayes' first assignment in the Navy was as a pilot flying the UH-1N and C-12B at Naval Air Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, from July 1990 to May 1991. Following training in the SH-60B Seahawk helicopter, he reported to Helicopter Anti-Submarine Squadron, Light Four Eight (HSL-48) as the Detachment Five Assistant Maintenance Officer. He qualified as an Aircraft Commander and deployed aboard USS Boone (FFG-28) to the Mediterranean. He was next assigned to Detachment One as the Maintenance Officer during Operation Support Democracy to Haiti while embarked on USS Spruance (DD-963). He also was deployed on USS Comte de Grasse in 1995, flying missions in support of exercise UNITAS around South America. Lieutenant Commander Mayes joined the Navy's Senate Liaison team in January 1996. During his service as a Navy Liaison Officer, he provided members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, personal staffs, as well as Senators from both sides of the aisle, with timely support regarding Navy plans, programs and constituent casework. His valuable contributions have enabled Congress and the Department of the Navy to work close together to preserve the well-trained and well-equipped naval forces upon which our country has come to depend. Mr. President, Gary Mayes, his wife Stephanie and their daughter Gabrielle have made many sacrifices during his 10-year Navy career. He has served proudly with a dedication and enthusiasm that only comes from our Nation's best and brightest. Lieutenant Commander Mayes is a great credit to both our Navy and our country. As he now departs to attend the Marine Corps Command and Staff War College, I call upon my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to wish him fair winds and following seas.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 2 p.m. Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of the tobacco bill. As a reminder to all Senators, any votes ordered today with respect to the bill will occur at 5 p.m. this evening. I believe there is one amendment that there may be a vote on. We should expect a vote at 5 o'clock, and it will probably be very close to 5 in order to accommodate Senators who will have to leave shortly thereafter. It is expected that no more than two votes will be ordered today. Pending is the amendment of Senator Reed of Rhode Island regarding the deductibility of tobacco advertising. We hope to lock in that vote for 5. But we will notify Members if it is going to be any different from that. It is hoped that the next Republican amendment can also be offered today. The vote on that may follow the vote on the Reed amendment. But, again, that has not been locked in yet. We may also attempt to reach an agreement with regard to the Higher Education Act. We made some progress on that last week. There are some concerns still pending. But we will have the committee chairman and the Members working on the Higher Education Act. We need to get that completed. We have extended the time for the loans and grants under that act for 90 days. We don't have the July 1 deadline that would cause the students not to get their loans and grants, but the program expires July 1. We need to try to get that legislation moved as soon as possible. We also have the NASA authorization bill and the drug czar office reauthorization bill, as well as other legislation or Executive Calendar items that may be cleared for action. Any votes with regard to other items on the tobacco bill will occur then on Tuesday morning at a time to be determined by the two leaders-- probably around 9:30 or 10. But we will need to see if we have something ready by then. The official photo for the 105th Congress will take place tomorrow, Tuesday, June 16, at 2:15 p.m. All Senators are asked to be in the Chamber and seated at their desk at that time. Again, at 2:15 tomorrow, Tuesday, we will take the official photograph. This is the best time, looking at everybody's schedules and illnesses that we have been having to work around. But we want to get this done. We plan on doing it tomorrow. One final point: We expect that the education conference report will be available one day this week--maybe Wednesday. That is the Coverdell A+ issue with some other parts that were added to it in the Senate. I believe this is a conference report that will have broad bipartisan support. We will take that up when the conference report is available. Observing no Senator wishing to speak, I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, for the information of our colleagues, there will be no further votes tonight. The Senate will debate a Democratic amendment and the Gramm amendment to the tobacco bill during the remainder of today's session and Friday's session of the Senate. The Senate could also consider the higher education bill, or vocational education, or NASA authorization, or the reauthorization of the Drug Czar office. These are all bills that are relatively noncontroversial, or there may be an amendment or two that Senators want to offer. We are trying to take advantage of time that may be available tomorrow to consider one of these bills. We want all Senators to be aware that we are trying to clear one of these four to be considered tomorrow after the Democratic amendment and the Gramm amendment. However, there will be no votes during the session on Friday. There will just be debate on these two amendments and any bill that can be cleared out of this group of four. Any votes ordered with respect to the amendments on the legislation just identified, the tobacco bill, will be postponed to occur on Monday at a time to be determined by the two leaders, but not before 5 o'clock. We would like, though, to have those two votes back-to-back on the two amendments, if they are necessary, to the tobacco bill, as close to 5 o'clock as possible. We may begin at 5, or shortly thereafter, and have the two back-to-back. Then any vote, if necessary on any bill that is cleared, would not occur until Tuesday morning at approximately 9:30 or 10 o'clock. We will make that specific time available later.