Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, this cloture vote, then, would occur on Monday of next week, at a time to be determined by the majority leader after notification of the minority leader. I presume that will be around our normal voting time, at 5:30 on Monday. So I now ask consent that the mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that it be in order at this time to ask for the yeas and nays on Executive Calendar No. 525.

Mr. LOTT. As in executive session, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that tomorrow morning, immediately following the routine requests, the Senate proceed to executive session and immediately vote on the confirmation of the nomination of Executive Calendar No. 525, the nomination of Margaret McKeown, of Washington, to be U.S. circuit judge for the ninth circuit. I further ask unanimous consent that immediately following the vote, Executive Calendar No. 504 be confirmed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until 9 a.m. on Friday, March 27, 1998, and immediately following the prayer, the routine requests through the morning hour be granted.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution and preamble be agreed to, en bloc, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating thereto be printed in the Record as if read at the appropriate place.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 200, introduced earlier today by Senator Inouye.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period for morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 5 minutes each.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Are you trying to get time agreements and actually go to votes if they are going to be required?

Mr. LOTT. I thank the distinguished manager of the legislation and urge him to keep up his good efforts. At some point I hope he will do as he has been known to do, get very aggressive and help bring this to a conclusion. I do want to say to the Senator from Texas and others who may speak on Bosnia that I think this is a very important issue and, frankly, I hope it will not be just kind of set aside or swallowed up by the supplemental appropriations bill. The supplemental appropriations bill is urgent. It is for 1 specific fiscal year. The Bosnia issue really is broader than 1 year's emergency appropriations. I agree with the Senator from Texas that we need to get a clearer understanding about what is our mission in Bosnia: Is there a mission creep occurring? How much is it going to cost? I do not think we can just give the President a time period with no end in sight, just an interminable presence. I saw one prediction the other day we might have to have troops in Bosnia for 10 years. Not with my vote. So I do think we need to have a full discussion about this. I try very hard to be bipartisan--nonpartisan on foreign policy issues. But in Bosnia I have never felt comfortable with what our situation is there, and I still do not. So I understand what she is trying to do. I hope we can work together to find a time when we can have a full debate on this issue this year. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, let's see if we can find some way to complete the supplemental appropriations bills. They are emergency appropriations for defense and disasters. Of course, the IMF issue is a separate issue, and I realize there are some disagreements about it and how it should be handled. I personally think that we should find a way to provide the funds, but only--only--if strong conditions are in place to make sure that the American people have confidence these funds are not being misused and we have a chance to see how they are being used. We have to draw this to a conclusion. We still have a conference to go through, and we have other issues that we desperately need to take up. So I would like again to ask for cooperation on both sides of the aisle so we can complete this legislation.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, this morning the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1768, the emergency supplemental appropriations bill, with a hope of concluding action on the bill during today's session. Hopefully, we can do it by noon. In a moment I would like to address some questions to the manager of the bill, Senator Stevens, and get a feel for kind of where we are. As a reminder to all Members, the second cloture vote on H.R. 2646, the Coverdell A+ education savings account bill, was postponed yesterday and will occur at a time to be determined by the majority leader, as always, and we will notify the Democratic leader when a decision is made on that. And, as always, all Members will be notified when that vote will occur. It is still hoped that an agreement can be worked out with respect to an orderly handling of that bill. I expect we will not have the cloture vote until after we complete the supplemental appropriations, assuming we can get an early completion of that bill. Members can expect a busy day of floor activity, with votes to occur at least on the cloture and on the supplemental appropriations, perhaps on amendments to either one of those, and also the Senate may consider any executive or legislative items cleared for action.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, last night was a memorable night for this Senator and I believe a number of others in this Chamber. On Tuesday evening, I was honored and humbled to introduce to this body, Senator Mike Mansfield for an address in the old Senate Chamber. This inaugural lecture was the first of what I hope will be a continuing number of addresses for ``The Leader's Lecture Series''. I think I can speak for all Members of this Senate in saying we were honored in having as the first speaker in this series, the longest serving majority leader of this body, Senator Mike Mansfield of Montana. I look forward to future addresses from former Senate leaders and other distinguished Americans in sharing their insights about the Senate's recent history and long-term practices. I ask unanimous consent that the remarks of the distinguished former majority leader be printed in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today, I rise to personally commend Senator Hatch, my colleague and friend, for his leadership in helping obtain the passage of the National Tartan Day Resolution. Last week, the Senate passed the resolution by unanimous consent. This was no easy task and I want to acknowledge his efforts to ensure that the contributions of Americans of Scottish ancestry are recognized. I, along with many other Scottish-Americans, were very pleased with the passage of this legislation. I also want to thank the national and state associations which represent citizens of Scottish ancestry for their efforts to get the word out. They made sure that the members of the Senate were fully informed on the merits of this legislative initiative. They were active in obtaining cosponsors. They certainly made a difference in the legislative success of Senate Resolution 155. Mr. President, Scottish Americans have made many great contributions to our country. They work in many different fields and professions. They add to the very essence of what is known across the globe as the American character. Let me name a few of the more prominent Scottish- Americans: Neil Armstrong, Alexander Graham Bell, Andrew Carnegie, William Faulkner, Malcolm Forbes and Elizabeth Taylor, just to name a few. Today many Americans of Scottish ancestry continue to make an impact. Mr. President, National Tartan Day is more than a recognition of Americans with Scottish ancestry. National Tartan Day is about liberty. It is about the demand of citizens for their freedom from an oppressive government. Freedom is the significance of April 6th. On this day nearly seven hundred years ago, a group of men in Arbroath, Scotland asserted their independence from the English king. These Scots declared ``We fight for liberty alone.'' These are powerful words that should not be forgotten today or in the future. These were daring words. These Scotsmen were claiming liberty as their birthright. These were enduring words, like the mountains, hills and stones of Scotland. These words still ring true. The words and thoughts of those long-ago Scottish patriots live on in America. Liberty has been good to their descendants in the United States. Beyond all the accomplishments of Scottish-Americans are those words of strength, courage and perseverance: ``We fight for liberty alone, which no good man loses but with his life.'' By honoring April 6, Americans will annually celebrate the true beginning of the quest for liberty and freedom. Mr. President, I want to thank my colleagues who joined me in supporting this resolution; so that we may never forget, so that the world, in some small way, may never forget, far-away, long-ago Arbroath and the declaration for liberty.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. There will be no more votes when we come back in at 7:30, although we need to cooperate with the chairman of the Appropriations Committee and the ranking member to try to identify those amendments that will have to be disposed of, will have to be voted on. I urge, again, all Senators--I am not asking for amendments, but I am asking for cooperation in getting a limited number or identifying those amendments we are going to have to have a vote on so we can complete action on this emergency supplemental appropriations bill.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if the Senator would yield, I think that is a very generous offer by the Senator from Minnesota. We will make sure you get the 10 minutes tomorrow, hopefully, I guess, in the morning. That way we can recess before 6 o'clock and allow us to greet Senator Mansfield.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, to notify all Members, we are working and getting very close, I think, to a unanimous-consent agreement being possible with regard to the education savings account issue, and other issues, but we are not quite there. So we think we can keep working on it and reach agreement hopefully early in the morning. Also, I remind the Senate that we do have this very important opportunity to hear from our former distinguished majority leader, Mike Mansfield, at 6 o'clock. I would like for us to be able to start that right on time in deference to his agreeing to be with us. I urge all my colleagues to come to this first in a series of lectures from former majority leaders and Vice Presidents. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 7:30 p.m. at the conclusion of the 10-minute remarks by Senator Wellstone.

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

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, in view of one development that just occurred--and I think we will have the answer in just 2 or 3 minutes--I want to withhold that unanimous-consent request that we stand in recess until 7:30. I expect to renew that in 2 or 3 minutes. But I would like to hold it at this time; and, therefore, the Senator could be recognized in his own right to speak if that is what he has in mind.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, let me withhold while we confer a few minutes more. I don't seek recognition at this time.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the anniversary of the tragic and frightening natural gas explosion that occurred four years ago near Edison, New Jersey. According to the National Transportation Safety Board, that accident was caused by a gouge in a major natural gas pipeline from unreported external damage during excavation. This dramatic accident caused Congress to focus on underground damage prevention. Mr. President, I knew then that we needed to act to prevent future damage to the American underground infrastructure. I started working with Senator Bradley and Senator Lautenberg to develop ``one-call'' legislation to improve state laws so as to require excavators to call before they dig, and facility owners to mark their underground facilities accurately when notified. In spite of the clear need to act to reduce the number of dangerous and disruptive accidents at our underground facilities, the consensus needed to pass a one-call bill has eluded Congress for four years. This Congress is going to be different. Mr. President, the Senate has twice passed a one-call bill in this Congress. The Senate has made a great start. The Senate has a bipartisan bill. The Senate has a bill passed by all 100 members. The Lott-Daschle one-call bill (S.1115) passed the Senate unanimously. In the House, the Baker-Pallone one-call bill (H.R. 3318) is moving ahead. I believe this legislation is a compatible component for the ISTEA bill. There is an overwhelming logic that as this Congress deals with the surface infrastructure it should deal with our underground infrastructure. ISTEA is the right legislative vehicle for one-call. I promised my good friend, Bill Bradley, when he left the Senate that I would continue the legislative effort. This Congress is not going to let another anniversary pass without enacting a one-call bill into law. This Congress will not turn its back on Edison, New Jersey. This Congress will not turn its back on a common sense safety procedure. This Congress will not allow future Americans to be subjected to the tragic consequences of an avoidable natural gas explosion.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 7:30 p.m.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote scheduled to occur at 5:30 this evening be postponed to occur at a time to be determined by the majority leader after notification of the Democratic leader.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Let me put it this way. We will get a unanimous consent agreement on our side to go with this, but it is useless to go with it if the Democratic leader does not indicate that this is something on which he would like for us both to try to get approval.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I see the chairman of the Appropriations Committee here. He has some work he needs to do, amendments he needs to work on between now and 5:30. I believe we have an amendment to be offered around 5 with a vote to occur at 5:30. I see that Senator Daschle may want to respond more. I will run down two or three points, and perhaps we can wrap this up. As far as a move to try to block amendments, I remind the body that when this bill was called up, the motion to proceed was filibustered, objected to--not even to get to the substance or get to amendments, just the motion to proceed was filibustered. We had to have a cloture vote on even proceeding to the point where we might get to the substance. No amendments. I have suggested here 16 amendments, I believe it is, plus a substitute. If we need to give or take some, I am willing to work on that. Now, as far as whose willing to go along with this agreement, I remind my colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle that 55 of our Senators, every one of them, voted for cloture last week. And as far as regular procedure around here, regular procedure is that after you have talked for a while, cloture motions are quite often filed. I have watched Senator Mitchell and Senator Dole and Senator Byrd file cloture after cloture. I note to my colleagues that I have had to file clotures 43 times in the 105th Congress, and we have had to actually vote 31 times. Tomorrow, if we don't get this worked out, it will be 32 times to stop the talk and get to the substance. Also, you need to remember that postcloture doesn't mean you can't have amendments. They have to be germane amendments. There would still be amendments. I think there were maybe 14, 15, or 16 amendments filed that would have probably cleared the postcloture vote. So, who is being cut off here? I think the average American sitting out there listening to this is saying, ``I don't understand. You mean you are going to have 14 amendments on an education bill and you don't think that is enough?'' What is reasonable? I have tried to be. I will continue to be. If the Senator from South Dakota has some specific recommendation of how we can get to an agreement and not have to go through another cloture vote, I would certainly be more than glad to entertain that. I yield the floor. Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I know we are faced with a time problem, but since a separate extraneous issue was raised, I must respond to this question of judicial nominations. First of all, when I go to my State or around the country, the last thing I hear people clamoring for is more lifetime-tenured Federal judges. There is no clamor out there in the real world for more Federal judges. But, so the record will be clear, the number of Clinton appointments to the Federal judiciary as of that date is 252. The total number of Clinton nominees confirmed by the 105th Congress--that is last year and the first 3 months of this year--48, 9 for the court of appeals, 37 for district courts, 2 for the USIT; 36 in the first session and 12 in the second session. There are currently 81 vacancies in this very large Federal judiciary, and of that 81, 41 of them have not had nominees. It is pretty hard for us to consider nominees if we do not have them even presented to the Congress. I have been hearing this now for months about, ``Oh, why don't you move more?'' Maybe the administration ought to consider moving a little faster. They can't send them up here and immediately start complaining that they are not considered in the next week or even the next month. But half of the vacancies do not have a nominee pending. Plus, there are only six pending on the calendar, and we will probably consider a couple of those this week. So there will only be four pending on the Senate Executive Calendar for judicial positions. Then let me make one other point. Should we take our time and look at these people who are nominated to be Federal judges for life and hold sway over us in ways that exceed the imagination--and certainly I don't approve of--right down to trying to run our schools at the local level? Should we take our time, look at them carefully when they are received in the committee, have hearings on them, ask them a lot of questions, then send them to the floor and have them checked once again? Yes; and I will give you exhibit A of why we need to do that. Just look at the one that was withdrawn last week--Frederica Massiah- Jackson, a nominee for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, who used profanity from the bench, had identified undercover policemen so that they could be recognized by the criminal element, a whole raft of things that came out, and, by the way, much of it after she was nominated, after she was reported by the Judiciary Committee and had been pending in the Senate for months. Finally, the local district attorney--I might say, a Democrat--and the Pennsylvania District Attorneys Association came out in opposition to this nomination, and, after it had been reported by the Judiciary Committee, held on the floors for weeks and months, the administration, realizing she was going to be defeated, withdrew her nomination. Should we take our time on these Federal judges? Yes. Do I have any apologies? Only one: I probably moved too many already. I yield the floor. Mr. STEVENS addressed the Chair.