Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I thank the Chair. (Mr. ENZI assumed the chair.)

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I thank the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, it is quarter to 6. We are still working to try to get the list agreed on of what we are actually going to need to vote on. We still have probably 24 or 25 amendments that we still have to vote on--maybe more. But we are working to get that down. In order to get this completed, we need to really start to get rolling on these votes. We have been having them every 10 minutes. The Senator from Alaska is in the Chair. He knows how to do it. I urge Members to stay in the Chamber. We can move these along a lot faster. From here on they will be gaveled to a close after 10 minutes. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 2254

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the motion was rejected.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank Senator Nickles for the magnanimous gesture he just made. However, I want to emphasize we are trying to move these votes, and the Chair was absolutely right, because it is up to the discretion of the Chair to respond when Members ask how they are recorded, but also when regular order is called for, especially when we are trying to move through all these votes, the Chair is under an obligation to bring this to a conclusion. I think we had the right resolution here, but I want to make sure everybody understands, we are trying to move these votes through. We are trying to get to a conclusion, and that brings me to my next point. It is 5 after 9. We still have, it looks like, as many as five amendments that we may have to vote on. I urge Senators, if they are planning on calling up those amendments, to see if we can't work out something where maybe some of them can be accepted or not offered and that we not go through the process of having second-degree amendments offered at this point. If we can do that, we can finish this within this hour, by 10 o'clock. I thank Senator Reid and others for the work they have been doing in trying to help pare down the list. We are very close now, and I think it important we not lose the decorum we have exercised through a long day. I thank my colleagues for that. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I wanted to make the Members aware of that also, and also congratulate Senators Domenici and Lautenberg for the way they have worked together and the way they moved us through this very long process. It has been completed in record time, and I think we all owe them a debt of gratitude and appreciation. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Before I yield the floor, so Members will know this before we go to the vote, we will be in session tomorrow, but only for wrapup. We do have some Executive Calendar nominations I think we can clear. We have gotten agreement on the Shipping Act, so we will have debate on the bill and on one amendment, but the vote will not occur on that bill until we return. We will return on April 20, but the first recorded vote will be the morning of Tuesday, April 21. So after this recorded vote, that is the final vote for the night and for the week and the next will be April 21. Thank you all for your cooperation.

Mr. LOTT. Absolutely. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Are we waiting for the vote to be turned in?

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I am extremely pleased to announce that students from the great state of Mississippi, and from a number of other states, are participating in the Leadership Training Institute for Youth. This year the program will be held in Missouri. This invaluable program reaches out to our nation's most important resource, our children. As you know, ensuring safety and effectiveness in schools is an important priority for this Congress. This privately funded initiative helps Congress fulfill its fundamental goal of providing our nation's students with the best education in the world. The Institute, headquartered in Arkansas, brings together students from communities throughout the nation and from families in all walks of life. It is important to recognize that the young people selected for the program might not have this kind of leadership opportunity available to them in their local communities or even in their home states. The Leadership Training Institute instills in our youth a sense of purpose, belonging, spirituality, patriotism, and strong moral and ethical character. The Institute's teaching philosophy centers on biblical principles and the tenets espoused by America's founding fathers. Students learn that real leaders are people of faith, integrity, conviction, and moral fiber. These high school and college age students are given hands-on experience in dealing with compelling political, social, and ethical issues. These students work with experts from a wide range of disciplines to examine leadership competencies, civic responsibility, community and family values, as well as a number of other topics important to America's youth. During the program, these future leaders will explore such issues as how to: achieve a smaller, more effective government; reduce the burden of taxes on America's working families; reform the IRS; improve education and expand learning opportunities; and, combat violence and drugs in schools. Mr. President, this sounds like our Senate's agenda. These students will also meet with local, state, and national leaders to reflect on issues that truly matter--such as family, faith and freedom. As you know, family, faith and freedom must be the cornerstone of our public policy. Mr. President, I think this is an outstanding initiative and commend the efforts of the Leadership Training Institute for offering this model program to Mississippi's youth. These young achievers are our nation's future business executives and public officials. It gives me great hope for America's future to know that these young minds are being exposed to the challenging programs being offered by the Leadership Training Institute. I firmly believe that each student who graduates from the Institute will posses the strong, solid moral and value driven foundation needed to guide our nation into the next century. Again, I want to express my deep appreciation to the Leadership Training Institute for Youth for conducting this exemplary program.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I want to take a few moments to update my Senate colleagues on an important piece of legislation enacted in the last Congress. The bill, now a law, was about regulatory reform of a segment of the energy community, namely natural gas pipelines. As DOT begins the rulemaking process required by law, they do so with improved regulatory reform guidelines. Although this law only affects one statute and one agency it is real regulatory reform. It is the government and industry working together to make each more efficient and effective. It is government being held accountable for its rulemaking and regulatory decisions. This law, the Accountable Pipeline Safety and Partnership Act of 1996, passed the 104th Congress, bringing with it provisions that strengthen risk assessment, cost/benefit analysis and peer review. Last week the Department of Transportation announced its first participant in a demonstration program where the rules will be flexibly applied and pipeline safety will be improved. The Accountable Pipeline Safety and Partnership Act has two important elements which make it unique. First, all new pipeline safety regulations must undergo a risk assessment and cost/benefit analysis. This is crucial, because it ensures that new regulations and limited public resources are focused to maximize public benefit. This is real regulatory reform. The second notable element of the Accountable Pipeline Safety and Partnership Act is the risk management demonstration project. Intended to move the agency beyond the old ``command-and-control'' style of regulating, this project allows individual pipelines to propose their own safety procedures to DOT for review and approval. This type of risk management takes us to a higher and more sophisticated level of safety regulation. Once again, the agency is encouraged to direct limited resources towards activities that provide maximum safety to the public. This, too, is real regulatory reform. The Office of Pipeline Safety, has received a number of applications from pipeline companies that want to participate in the risk management demonstration project. One company has been approved and five other applicants are close to approval. These proposals have bolstered innovation in safety policy, and have encouraged pipeline companies to think beyond simple compliance with existing standards. The government is learning to think ``outside of the box'' and to consider creative industry solutions. This genuine reengineering partnership illustrates the fruits of real regulatory reform. The demonstration project illustrates a commitment by a number of DOT civil servants to the principles of this law. Three key staff deserve recognition for rapidly implementing the law: Kelley Coyner, Rich Felder, and Stacey Gerad. These civil servants ensured that the American public gets greater safety and environmental protection when industry is given flexibility. This law is a bargain for America. The Accountable Pipeline Safety and Partnership Act has restored trust between regulators and the regulated community. This new found trust will permit the sharing of research information that can be translated into improved pipeline safety technology. This trust has maximized both government and private dollars. Enacting this legislation is a formal recognition that there is a valid role for risk assessment and cost/benefit analysis in federal rulemaking. These steps must be taken when regulating, not simply as a check off or to satisfy requirements of transparency, but to genuinely incorporate the results into how the rules are made. Cost is an essential factor and cannot be dismissed by rulemakers. This regulatory reform is the law of the land for a small sector of our federal system. This incremental effort changed a public policy by establishing a new level of confidence among stakeholders. It did not create a cloud of legislative doubt and confusion. To the contrary, it received overwhelming support from both chambers of Congress. This initiative is indeed a genuine bipartisan regulatory reform approach. Regulatory reform should be incremental and fully bipartisan. If this Congress considers just one element of the regulatory process this year I believe it should be risk. There is a clear consensus among our colleagues that changes must be made to the rulemaking process. Risk is the basis for every rule, and should be the center of our next legislative correction. I frequently draw a comparison between risk and a dog's ear. As you wash a dog, it has a tendency to want to shake the water and shampoo off. Because a dog starts shaking at the head and will not stop until the final flick of the tail, holding the ear will stop the shaking. Just as the dog's ear is the starting point of a shake, risk is the starting point of the rulemaking process. Without a risk, there can be no rule. Without a free ear, a dog cannot spray water everywhere. The water and shampoo will be effectively applied to the desired subject, and not wasted by going everywhere. Get risk right and the regulated industry will have respect for the rulemaking process. Ignoring risk and working on anything else is like holding the dog's tail --you will get soaked as the dog shakes from the head down to its tail. Unnecessary rules and regulations will abound. I want to thank my colleagues for their attention. Regulatory reform is a passion in which I have invested six years. It is an area I will remain engaged in because more legislative changes are needed. It may take years of incremental efforts, but only this step-by-step approach will generate the confidence and comfort necessary to reform the rulemaking process. Current regulations were enacted during the years when the philosophical approach was one-size-fits-all. This is no longer operative. These rules and procedures should be updated in a deliberate but incremental manner to reflect today's modern approach-- an approach that permits innovative technology and offers flexibility. Mr. President, the approval of this demonstration program is a validation of today's modern approach. Safety will not be jeopardized and environmental protection will not be compromised. It is a recognition that regulatory reform, when done incrementally and with the goal of producing effective regulations, can have a real impact on government's rulemaking.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. LOTT. That is correct. I think this is a very major step forward. We will still need to assess where we are tonight and in the morning. Any amendments still pending at the end, we will still have to deal with those in as orderly a fashion as we possibly can. But I think this will help us move a number of amendments so that we won't have as many amendments at the end of the session.

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

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I do amend the unanimous consent request to include the 1 minute before each vote and ask for a ruling now.

Mr. LOTT. That is correct.

Mr. LOTT. Would the Democratic leader like to make a comment before I make the UC? In order to ascertain the remaining workload then ahead of us to bring the budget resolution to conclusion, I now ask unanimous consent that all first-degree amendments must be offered by 6 p.m. this evening. I further ask that at 5:40 p.m. this evening the minority manager be recognized to offer any amendments necessary for the minority side of the aisle, and at 5:50 p.m. Senator Domenici be recognized for up to 10 minutes to offer amendments necessary at that point for the majority side. I further ask that following the scheduled 2 p.m. vote today, all first-degree amendments be limited to 30 minutes, all second-degree amendments be limited to 20 minutes, with any votes ordered on any remaining amendments to be stacked in a sequence to be decided by the two managers. I further ask that the first vote in the stacked voting sequence be limited to 15 minutes and all remaining votes in the sequence be reduced to 10 minutes in length. We hope they will stack as many as three and four in those groupings. But it will be up to them, after, of course, consulting with the leaders, to make sure we are taking into consideration other things that may be going on. I finally ask that all time consumed during rollcall votes be counted against the overall statutory time limit and the new time restraints on first- and second-degree amendments expire at the conclusion or yielding back of the overall time limit.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could say to the Senator from Kentucky, they are certainly involved in very important work, and we will take that into consideration. As a matter of fact, we are going to enter a unanimous consent request that would allow us to stack some votes. Senator Daschle had suggested that, and it seems like a good way to proceed where we will have up to as many as, I think, four votes that are stacked.

Mr. LOTT. I am glad to yield.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, this is not aimed at any Senator or group of Senators, but it is so that we will all be on notice. In order to be able to complete this budget resolution, we are going to have to stick to the 15 minute-votes. I realize that there are markups going on and Senators have a lot of commitments, but for the remainder of today-- Senator Daschle and I have talked about this--we think it is important we begin to stick to 15-minute votes or 10-minute votes if we have in a group stacked votes, so we will start sticking pretty close to the time that is allocated.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I wish to rise and take this opportunity to say farewell to an outstanding Non-Commissioned Officer of the Mississippi Army National Guard, First Sergeant Charles W. Parker, upon his retirement. Throughout his military career, First Sergeant Parker served the people of Mississippi with valor and distinction. It is my privilege to recognize his many accomplishments and to commend him for the superb service he has provided the Mississippi Army National Guard and the Nation for the past 32 years. First Sergeant Parker enlisted in the Mississippi Army National Guard in August 1965, and served as a federal technician from October 1971, until February 1981. He then began an active duty career in the Guard as a Training Non-Commissioned Officer from February 1981, until his retirement in April 1998. He served the majority of his military career with Company B, 223rd Engineer Combat Battalion, in Calhoun City, Mississippi. During his 32 years of service, First Sergeant Parker was activated three times to provide relief due to flooding, ice storms and tornadoes. First Sergeant Parker served the Great State of Mississippi with honor. He received the Army Meritorious Service Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Army Achievement Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal (4), Reserve Components Achievement Medal (5), Armed Forces Reserve Medal (3), National Defense Medal (2), Army Physical Fitness Award (14) and achieved the highest score in his company, battalion, group and brigade on more than one occasion. During his 32 years of military service, First Sergeant Parker led his men selflessly by continuously putting his subordinate soldiers before himself. He is known by all throughout the State of Mississippi in National Guard circles for helping young people get into the Guard and continue their education. Most importantly, First Sergeant Parker is also a loving husband and father to his wife Sandra, sons Brent and Kent, daughter Vanessa. While he missed valuable time away from his family during his military career, he must look forward to spending many wonderful years with them in retirement. I know his family and the Mississippi Army National Guard are proud of his many accomplishments. My colleagues in the Senate join me in wishing First Sergeant Parker well upon his retirement. The Great State of Mississippi and the Nation are indebted to him for his many years of distinguished service.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. This is the last vote tonight. Senator Daschle and I talked and we want the Members to know there will be a series of votes beginning tomorrow morning at 9 o'clock--probably two on judges and five amendments that the managers are going to have ready to vote on in the morning--beginning at 9 o'clock, with seven votes in a series. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 2211

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, as my colleagues are aware, the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 created procedures for judicial review of employment discrimination claims throughout the Congress to govern cases arising after the requirements of the law took effect on January 23, 1996. The Senate's antecedent process for review of discrimination claims in Senate employment, which was created by the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991, continues to govern older cases. The cases of William L. Singer versus Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices and Office of the Senate Sergeant at Arms versus Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices, now pending in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, arise under the 1991 Act. These consolidated cases present the Federal Circuit with two petitions for review of the same underlying order. The first petition was filed by William Singer, a former member of the Capitol Police. After Officer Singer filed his petition for review, the Office of the Senate Sergeant at Arms, Officer Singer's ``employing office'' under the statute, filed its own petition for review. Both petitions seek review of a ruling of the Select Committee on Ethics concerning Officer Singer's request for reimbursement of attorneys' fees incurred in an underlying employment discrimination action. Under the Government Employee Rights Act, a final decision of the Ethics Committee is entered in the records of the Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices, which is then named as the respondent if the decision is challenged in the Federal Circuit. As petitions for review in the Federal Circuit challenge final decisions of a Senate adjudicatory process, under the Government Employee Rights Act the Senate Legal Counsel may be directed to defend those decisions through representation of the Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices in court. Accordingly, this resolution directs the Senate Legal Counsel to represent the Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices, in the cases of Singer versus Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices and Office of the Senate Sergeant at Arms versus Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices, in defense of the Ethics Committee's final decision.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. We had one Senator who indicated a desire to be notified and had been in the air. He is in his State, and I understand we can't talk to him for 2\1/2\ hours. And for us to just mark time until then didn't seem fair. I think it will be all right. I felt that after discussion with Senator Daschle, that was the only thing I could do. But I think it is fair and we should move forward with it.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.