Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from South Carolina.

Mr. LOTT. We have some unanimous-consent requests and then Senator Domenici has an issue, but there will be time for brief remarks. Mr. THURMOND addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. I yield for a further question.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I yield to the great senior Senator from New Mexico.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I indicated last Saturday on a radio show that if we could get this answer to the American people's prayers this week, I would whistle ``Hail to the Chief'' in the Senate. Well, the rules do not allow that. I am afraid that Senator Byrd would come down and chastise me if I whistle, but let me tell you I am humming ``Hail to the Chief'' to the American people today because we have accomplished an awful lot in reaching the agreement on these two major bills. I was reading an article last night entitled, ``O Ye of Little Faith,'' and it made me think about what we have gone through the last few weeks. I just have to ask the Senate this morning, how many of us really, really thought we were going to get this done and that we were going to get it done this week? Even 1 week ago there were those who were saying, ``Oh, no, you can't get that done before we go out for the August recess. Wait until September; we will do it then.'' But we persisted. We just kept saying we can get through this. We can do this together. We can do the right thing for the American people, and we can do it now, because it has been a long time coming. I think it is appropriate that on both sides of the aisle and both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, Republicans and Democrats, House and Senate, and, yes, the President, all are saying this is good for America. It is not utopia. It does not solve all the problems. There are some things in here I do not like. There are some things in here that the Senator from New Jersey does not like. But it is a major step forward-- maybe not a leap but a major step forward. We are doing some things we promised the American people, things that really matter. It matters that we are going to get to a balanced budget, and this time it is with honest numbers. We are really going to do it. And for a lot of reasons we may do it before the year 2002. This is the type of commitment that I have not seen in the Congress in a bipartisan way in the 25 years that I have had the honor of serving the people of Mississippi. So I think we should declare this is a very important step forward. It is worth having. I was doing an interview yesterday and somebody said: Well, not enough in the tax bill, not enough tax relief. Why wasn't there more? Why didn't you insist on this? Why didn't you insist on that? I have a simple question. Is some tax relief better than no tax relief? There are those who would rather have nothing if they cannot get everything. Ladies and gentlemen, my colleagues in the Senate, these bills are worth having. I am proud to say that I worked on it for 8 months of my life. This past Saturday night and Sunday morning, I thought we had lost it. I was boiling inside. I was disturbed. I was hurt that we were going to let this moment get away from us. But I guess maybe after a Sunday morning of reflection and prayer, we said, no, we are going to do this. And so we did. The President made a commitment. He wanted to get it done. The leadership in the Congress, House and Senate, Republican and Democrat, wanted to get it done, and that is why we just did it. We went ahead and did it. Let me say to my colleagues here today, there are so many I want to thank and congratulate for this step forward, but I have to begin with the distinguished Senator from New Mexico. None of us has worked longer, none of us has contributed more, none of us knows more about what is in this bill than Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico. He has been my confidante. He has been my trusted ally. He has done this when, in his own personal life, he has had problems to worry about. And so I know that the President, the Democrats and Republicans on both sides of the aisle, want to say thanks a lot, Pete. You did a great job for your country. His colleague on the other side of the aisle, Senator Lautenberg, could have walked away from this. Even at the last moment, something he cares about tremendously, guaranteeing we get the Amtrak funds--it is in there, but with a condition--he could have said, if I can't get what I want, I am not going to do this. He is not going to do that. He is going to do what is right for his State and the country. My colleague, Tom Daschle, from South Dakota, yesterday said some very nice things about my efforts, and I have to say the same about him. He was reliable. He was honest with me. He stayed the course. He came to the meetings. There were some meetings he didn't get to come to. A lot of people had an opportunity to get their egos hurt, but everybody rose above it. Pat Moynihan, Finance Committee, bipartisan effort. We reported one of these bills, I think it was 18 to 2, the other one 20 to nothing, out of the Finance Committee, but it began with Bill Roth, the chairman of the Finance Committee, and the Senator from New York. They made up their minds they were going to get it done, and they were going to do it together, and the rest of us could come along if we wanted. Our scholar Senator helped lead the way. I have to say again about Bill Roth, patience, tenacity, he was not going to relent on getting this job done. And the Finance Committee had both of these bills. No other committee in Congress had to do it that way. In the House, it was Ways and Means and Commerce Committee as well as Budget. Over here, it was just Budget and Finance. He did a great job. We would not have what we have in the tax bill on IRA's; we would not have what we have on Amtrak; we would not have what we were able to get on a myriad of issues in this legislation. He did a fantastic job. I could go on down the list, but it truly is a bipartisan effort, and I am proud of that. Some people say, ``Why don't you draw the line and fight?'' I have done that. Sometimes it is fun, but it doesn't produce anything but a fight most of the time. So there will be another day to differentiate between the parties, but today we are going to do what is right for the country. This bill is rightly called the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. It contains literally hundreds of positions that will get us to that balanced budget. But the bottom line is, it is something the American people have been waiting to hear for many years. We will have a balanced budget by the year 2002 and thereafter. How is that accomplished? Well, it does have spending reductions of approximately $270 billion over 5 years. It has $140 billion in restraint on appropriated accounts. It has $132 billion in entitlements and net interest savings. It does provide help for children's health, and that is a bipartisan effort. Most of us are parents. Most of us have children in our States who are not covered. We disagree about how much we should pay for it, how much should be done, but it is something we care about and we should do. And we get it done in this bill. Now, we give as much flexibility as we can to the States, and that is the way it should be. I have faith in my own Governor and my own legislature. I want these decisions to be made as close to the people that need this help, as close to the children as possible. What they need in West Virginia may be different from what they need in Arizona. Give that flexibility so that the decisions are close to the people and so it is provided in a way that will really provide the help it should. I want to make this important point about Medicare. We are going to improve Medicare. We are going to save Medicare from going insolvent for another several years at way out to, I believe, close to the year 2007 probably, and we are going to do it with flexibility. We are going to give the seniors a chance to choose. They can go with the old system; they can go with an HMO; they can go with a professional services organization; they can have medical savings accounts. We have done what we have been arguing about for 4 years. We are actually doing it. We are doing what we said we were going to do in Medicare and that alone, what we are doing in Medicare alone is worth voting for this legislation. What other problems you may have with this bill--some of the changes in welfare, I think, go the wrong direction; we really want to get people from welfare to work. This bill has some problems, but just the Medicare provision makes it worthwhile. We have some savings in Medicaid. The States will have a greater ability to deliver health services more efficiently for poor persons. When you look through the list of things that we have done here, in instance after instance, I think we should be very proud. I am here today to tell you that I am going to vote for this legislation with pride, not with fear and trepidation, not with reservations or grumpiness because I didn't get everything I wanted, but because the process worked. Our system of Government worked here like I think our forefathers intended for it to work, and we are going to produce genuine results that will be of benefit. In this bill and in the other bill we will pass for our children our educational system in America, child health care, the guarantee of the important programs that we want for our seniors. From the day we are born to the day we die, there will be benefits coming out of this legislation. So I urge my colleagues, let us make this an overwhelming vote. I think we will have as near to a unanimous vote as you will ever get in the Senate on a bill of this magnitude, a bill of this size. I think when we vote on it, it is going to pass overwhelmingly. Then we are going to go to the tax relief package, which I am tremendously excited about. I am glad to have been a part of this effort. It has been worthwhile. It has been long. It has been tedious. It has tried my patience. I lost my temper a few times, along with others, and for those occasions I apologize. But we got it done, and we will have more decisions made by the people at the State level; we will have genuine tax relief; we will have security for our seniors, and now and then we can move on and address other problems that we need to take up for the future of our country. I thank the Chair and I thank all Senators for what you have done on this.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Roth, for yielding me this time and thank him for his great work. I talked about that this morning in relation to the balanced Budget Act, but I think it is even more appropriate that I commend him for his diligence, patience, persistence, leadership, his bipartisan effort. He did a great job on this legislation. I am extremely proud of him and I think he should feel proud. Also Senator Moynihan, for his cooperation and for the way he approaches his legislative responsibilities, we thank him. Without his being willing to support this we would not have had the 80 votes that we had when the bill passed the Senate a month ago. To the Senator in the Chair, the Senator from New Mexico, his imprint is over both these bills; all over them. I thank him for that. This morning I was satisfied with our action on the balanced budget. I was pleased we got it done. I thought it was an important thing to do and that we should get it done and move forward and reach a balanced budget with honest numbers. But, with this bill I am enthusiastic, I am really excited about what this legislation does. It is going to help our children with the tax credits and education provisions. I feel good about the education provisions. Some people say, ``Well I don't like that part or the other part.'' Education is about the future of America, and we put some of the President's provisions in there but we put some others in there that will help our children have a better access to community colleges and universities and colleges. It is worthwhile and I am proud of that. A lot of young people, young business men and women are going to benefit from this. My own son, a young entrepreneur, will benefit from it. And even he was excited, the other night, when I told him what was in this bill. Nothing makes a father prouder than for his own son to say, ``Dad, this will help me to create some more businesses and hire some more people.'' He has 60 young people working for him now. This is what the American dream is all about: Investors, savers, farmers, small business men and women, spouses, and seniors. This is one that really does what we said it was going to do, and we got it done. I am very proud of it. This is the first significant tax cut for working Americans in 16 years. It is long overdue. Taxes are too high in my opinion. The Tax Code is obviously too complex and complicated. The IRS is too intrusive in our lives and everybody knows it. Congressional Republicans and a lot of Democrats wanted to do more than just talk about tax relief, they wanted to get it done. We wanted to deliver and we wanted to provide this legislation. We picked up considerable bipartisan support and came together in a way that I have not seen the Senate come together in the years that I have been in the Senate, certainly as majority leader. It was a good feeling. We went out on the steps of the Capitol and said we had done this job for the American people. I thought it was constructive and thoughtful, and I was very proud of it. The President also supports this bill. I am glad that he has supported this tax package and the tax relief that we are giving to the American people. He insisted that some parts of it be dropped. I was very disappointed in that. But we insisted on some things that he didn't want to go along with. As I said repeatedly, we gave ground on both sides, but we found common ground in many instances. I was particularly concerned, though, about one provision that we had to drop, the so-called Coverdell amendment that would have allowed for an education IRA to be used to pay for education from K through high school, for elementary and secondary. Yes, I like the fact that we are helping community college opportunities for our children, and universities and colleges. But the truth of the matter is, the problem in education in America is not at the higher education level. Our higher education system in America is a good one. It is broad, it is diverse, there is lots of choice. The problem is at the elementary and secondary level. Why shouldn't a parent, who can now put $500 in the Roth education IRA opportunity, be able to take some of that money to help their children in the fourth grade with some tutoring, so they can learn to read better, or to get help with remedial arithmetic? Why shouldn't a parent be able to do that? I think they should, and I am very sorry that we had to drop this from the package. But the President insisted that this not be allowed because, he said, it would undermine public education. I don't want to do that. I am a product of public education. My mother is a public education schoolteacher. So there were some disappointments along the way. But there is a lot of good in this bill. Everybody can declare a victory in being for this, because the American people, the American family will benefit from this legislation. Three years ago, congressional Republicans promised the American people a $500-per-child tax credit to help them save for the future or to meet the costs of raising a family in today's world. We kept that promise. And along the way, the Democrats got involved. They put their imprint on it. But the main thing is they are going to get this help. Parents with children will get some help to do things for their own children. I think we should be proud of that. At the start of this Congress I urged that the Republican conference introduce, as our first bill, a bill to help families with the needs for education and for college costs. S. 1, the first bill that was introduced this year, our highest priority, was in education. The legislation before us today incorporates many of those tax provisions. If American families are looking for someone to thank, they need to look to further than the sponsors and the leaders of this legislation, Senator Roth and Senator Moynihan. They really did a great job. They brought us together and they produced the final package that we are voting on here today. Amazing as it seems, we have been willing to resist some of the criticisms that we should not give tax relief for working Americans. We have done it here. We have kept our promises. I think it is going to be good for the economy. Allow the people, allow our people in this country to make some decisions of how they will help their own children, when it comes to the tax credit, and for education. Let them decide how they will use their money to pay for education. We are making individual retirement accounts available to almost everybody, especially homemakers. We have that up, now, so they can put in $2,000 like everybody else. Why shouldn't they be able to? But they had not been able to in the past. Now homemakers have this opportunity, just like everybody else, to have this IRA. We are reducing the unfair tax on capital gains, including homeowners. That alone is going to help fire up the economy even more, foster job creation and expand opportunity for every willing worker. So, this is an important package. But I want the taxpayers of America to understand this. It is only a downpayment. It is not Utopia. It's not everything we would like to do. It doesn't make the Tax Code a lot less complicated. In fact, it maybe goes the other way. But it's a step in the right direction. It provides help where it is needed and there will be another day for us to have a fairer Tax Code. So, it is the kind of legislation that we need. We have come together to pass it. It will provide extensive tax relief. Tax reform will be something we will do another day. But we have done a good job here, and I urge my colleagues to rally round the banner of lower taxes and economic growth and join me in sending America's tax cut to the President for his signature. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I would like to take a moment to recognize two young people who served on my staff through all the long hours and difficult days of the last year. After I was elected majority leader, the next morning at 9 o'clock, I was in the majority leader's office, but I only had about a third or half of the staff that I needed. I had some interns from my State of Mississippi, some college students, who had been working with me just through the summer. I asked them to stay and help us, and they have been with me the last year. They filled positions that are very vital. They did a great job. Dan Dukes of Como, MS, has been like my alter ego. He has been with me throughout the day and, on occasions, when I had to go downtown, he has just done a fantastic job. He has been my personal assistant, shepherding my appointments, finding my lost notebooks, and keeping up with my headlong dashes from meeting to meeting. Dan has had the patience of a saint and the attention to detail of a seasoned Hill staffer. It is an understatement to say that I will miss him as he returns home to finish his studies at the University of the South in Sewanee, TN. This is one of those occasions when we say goodbye to a young man with every expectation that we will be seeing him often--and hearing about him too. I have the same feeling about him as I once had about a youngster on my staff by the name of Chip Pickering, who now represents the Third District of our State. I want to express to him publicly my appreciation for filling in the way he did and doing a great job. I also want to recognize Celeste Embrey of Southaven, MS, who has been one of the two receptionists in my front office who answered the thousands of calls that have come in, some of them not always very complimentary. She has done it with just charm and grace. In fact, she does just a great job that the President of pro tempore, the Senator from South Carolina, comes by to check on her several times each week to make sure she is doing all right. She appreciates that, and I appreciate that. Even my colleagues who do not know her by name know well her unfailing smile, her enthusiastic greeting, her ability to make everyone feel at home. If you have enjoyed the atmosphere of true southern hospitality in my office, you have Celeste to thank. But you cannot fully appreciate what she has done for us until you overhear her conversations with callers-- whether from Mississippi or around the country. She has always dealt with their questions and handled their complaints with a concern and patience that go well beyond the call of duty. Celeste is off to graduate school, and though there will soon be another person at her desk in my outer office, there will still be a void in our staff. I will have to get her new phone number so that any of us who miss the brightness of her welcome and the cheer of her voice can keep in close touch. Dan and Celeste are the kind of young people who keep up our faith in the rising generation. I am proud of them. I hope they will always be proud to have been part of the Lott team. I want to say to these two very fine young people, I really appreciate their work. I am proud of them, and I wish them Godspeed in whatever they do in the years to come.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now turn to House Joint Resolution 90, regarding hand enrollment, that the joint resolution be passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, under the provisions of Senate Resolution 98 regarding global climate change, the two leaders have the authority to appoint 12 Senators to serve on the Global Climate Change Observer Group. Last week, the Senate adopted the Hagel-Byrd resolution regarding global climate change. This resolution encouraged the creation of a bipartisan group of Senators to monitor the status of negotiations on global climate change and to report periodically to the Senate on those negotiations. As such, the minority leader and I have appointed 12 Senators to serve on this Global Climate Change Observer Group. Due to their diligent efforts on the global climate issue, I have asked our colleague from Nebraska, Chuck Hagel, to serve as chairman, and the distinguished gentleman from West Virginia, Robert Byrd, to serve as cochairman of the group. The other Members of the observer group will include Senators Abraham, Chafee, Craig, Murkowski, Roberts, Baucus, Bingaman, Kerry, Levin, and Lieberman. I greatly appreciate our colleagues' willingness to take on this important task and look forward to hearing their reports.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, it is my hope that the Senate will be able to make a great deal of progress this week. We have a number of votes that already have been agreed to and we have several bills that we may be able to consider before the week is out. Today it had been my understanding that we would be able to begin consideration of S. 830, the Food and Drug Administration reform bill. I understand that there would be an objection to proceeding to that measure at this time. I certainly regret that. I don't understand why that is the case. I had been told on Friday that, after a lot of laborious negotiations, agreement had been reached. Certainly we need to pass this legislation. There are very few organizations in this city that are more in need of reform than the FDA which, for years, has been bureaucratic; it has been dilatory; it has delayed access for the American people to medical procedures that clearly should have been approved earlier, that are available in other countries, including Great Britain; they delayed approval of drugs that could mean a great deal of comfort to Americans. At the same time, they have been over trying to push into other areas where they really have no business. So, to say the least, I have a very low regard for the FDA, and they are long overdue for reform. This legislation has been pending in the Senate both last year and this year. The chairman of the committee of education and labor has reported that bill out. Negotiations have been underway with a number of Senators, including Senator Mack, Senator Frist, Senator Kennedy, and I presume Senator Durbin, and I thought that all had come to resolution. But it appears now that we will not be able to go forward with it at this time. But we will continue to look for an opportunity to get that done this week. As all Senators are aware, this is the last week of legislative business prior to the August adjournment for our State work periods. There are a number of important issues that will be considered this week, including the conference reports on the budget, Balanced Budget Act of 1997, and the Tax Relief Act. I get a lot of inquiries about that, will we do it or not? Have we reached an agreement with the administration or not? Negotiations continue; they continued throughout the weekend. There were communications on Friday, meetings on Saturday, a number of communications back and forth between the Congress and the administration all through the day yesterday, all the way up until about 9:15 or 9:30 last night, and there are negotiations underway now with the exchange of paperwork as to exactly what these issues may mean. Some of them are pretty complicated, in terms of the formulas that will be used--how do you define a benefits package where the States and the Governors and the legislators have the maximum flexibility in providing the services for the needs of the children in their respective States? But I would have to say, I think we are very close. I continue to be relatively optimistic. I must say, this agreement on both the spending bill and the tax relief package is worth having. I hope we will continue to try to come to a conclusion today, if at all possible. We will be completing work also this week on the Commerce, State, Justice appropriations bill as well as the Department of Transportation appropriations bill. Previous agreement was entered into also last week to complete action on S. 39, the tuna-dolphin bill, early this week. So we expect that sometime in the next 2 days we will have a 30-minute time for debate and possibly a recorded vote, but a vote of some sort on the compromise that was worked out on that issue last Friday. At 5 p.m. this afternoon, the Senate will begin consideration of the Transportation appropriations bill. We hope to get most of the work done on that appropriations bill tonight, done tonight. There will be no rollcall votes today. Tomorrow morning the Senate will be scheduled to have a series of votes, or we were scheduled to have a series of votes with debate beginning at 8:30 and votes occurring, I believe, beginning at 9:30, on the Commerce, State, Justice appropriations bill, but we understand that there is a memorial service for Justice Brennan that will be held on Tuesday morning, so it may be necessary to delay these votes and, as always, Members will be notified exactly when that will be. There will be some stacked votes, I don't know right now whether it's 2, 3, or 4, with relation to Commerce, State, Justice. But it will be later in the morning or in the early afternoon, so we can accommodate Senators who would like to attend the memorial service. Then we can complete action on the bill. I had hoped we would have agreement on the spending and on the tax relief bill early enough that we could actually get started on it on Tuesday morning. It looks like we will not be able to do that, but we still want to get the final votes on the State, Justice, Commerce appropriations bill as soon as we can and be prepared to move swiftly to the budget agreements once they are reached. I thank all Senators for their cooperation. I know this will be, again, a hectic week. But I believe we can complete 2 more appropriations bills which will put us at 10, leaving only 3 that we would have to work on when we return in September. That is an incredible pace, and I am very pleased with the cooperation that we have had in getting that done. I hope we can continue that. We also, again, hope to complete action on two or three other bills; most important, the budget agreements. When that is completed, of course, we would then have an opportunity to turn to the Executive Calendar also. Mr. President, I would like to hear from the distinguished Senator from Vermont as to what is the state of negotiations regarding the Food and Drug Administration reform package. I know he has worked very hard on it. We hope to get that done this week. I would be glad to hear his impressions of how we are going to do that.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I further ask that the majority leader, after consultation with the Democratic leader, may turn to S. 39, and one managers' amendment be in order, and time for the amendment and the debate on the bill be limited to 30 minutes, equally divided in the usual form, and following the conclusion or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to vote on the amendment, to be followed by third reading and passage of S. 39, as amended, if amended.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order entered July 24 with respect to S. 39, order No. 11, which is with regard to the tuna-dolphin issue, be vitiated.

Mr. LOTT. Let me wrap this up right quick because Senator McCain needs to be able to comment on this, too. For the information of all Senators, in light of this agreement with respect to the tuna-dolphin legislation, the cloture vote was vitiated; therefore, there will be no further votes to occur today. The next votes will occur in stacked sequence on Tuesday, July 29, beginning at 9:30 a.m. I want to thank all Senators for their cooperation, especially the Senator from Maine, Senator Snowe. She did outstanding work. She did not always receive the type of consideration she should have, but she has risen above that. Without her agreement, this would not have been possible. Also, of course, Senator McCain has been diligent in his work, as always, and also Senator Kerry, who got involved to help us work this out. I would like to make sure now that Senator McCain has a chance to speak and put the proper perspective on all of this.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I support Senate Resolution 98, the sense- of-the-Senate resolution on the Global Climate Change Treaty submitted by Senators Byrd and Hagel and supported by nearly two-thirds of the Senate. Like many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I have many serious concerns about the economic impact that this treaty would have on our Nation. By adopting this amendment, the Senate will be exercising its constitutional role of advising the executive branch as part of a treaty process. The President should take this resolution as a serious and constructive step in the treaty process. Before we take another step toward ratification, I believe that the Senate must insure that the economic impact and inequity of this international agreement be fully aired for the American people. As written, this legally binding treaty would require the United States and other developed countries to reduce their carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2010. In order to meet these targets, the United States would either have to issue new regulations or levy huge taxes on all fossil fuels in proportion to their carbon contents. Economists have suggested that stabilizing emissions at 1990 levels with a tax could cut America's gross domestic product by $350 billion. Further regulations would likely take even billions more from our economy. And what would the developing nations contribute? What would our neighbors in Mexico have to do to help stop global warming? Nothing. What about other so-called developing nations like Korea, China, India, and Brazil? The treaty lets them off the hook. Mr. President, this is not an equitable international policy. This is not a level playing field for the United States. Simply put, I believe the United States should not ratify this treaty as it stands. I do not believe that this Nation has been a bad actor when it comes to characterizing our environmental public policy. In fact, I believe America has already set the example. An example which all Americans have through their taxes and prices on many commodities has already paid for. Unless all the citizens of the globe are involved, there is a clear inequity. Mr. President, this does not mean I do not want to address the issue of curtailing carbon emissions. It means that we should only participate in a fair, balanced equitable agreement where all nations must participate. Is there such a thing as global warming? We must admit that there is no consensus among scientists about the validity of this theory. While some cry that the polar ice caps are melting as we speak, others point out that the lower atmosphere has shown no statistically significant warming in the past 19 years. I do not believe this is the place to launch a debate on the quality of the scientific data. I simply point out that the science is not settled or certain. So why rush into signing a legally binding and economically damaging international agreement? This much is certain--in order for America to reach the treaty's goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2010, the United States will have to reduce their fossil fuel use by at least 25 percent. How do those who advocate this treaty think this will impact our country? Mr. President, let me give my colleagues some illustrations of what our Nation could face: First, energy taxes on energy use which would reduce economic growth by nearly 3 percent annually, increasing consumer costs by $110 billion; second, the loss of under 2 million American jobs, most of which will actually move overseas; and third, harm to the steel, basic chemicals, petroleum refining, aluminum, paper and cement industries, which would be targeted for severe restrictions by the treaty. The Byrd-Hagel resolution states that the United States should not be a signatory to any agreement that ``would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States.'' I believe this is a reasonable and responsible action. Mr. President, this treaty imposes very serious burdens on our economy with little environmental gain. This is just not a sound public policy. I have but one question for those who want to sign the treaty: How can America help the global environment by wreaking havoc and permanent harm on our own economy? This administration says that the United States--all alone--should decrease its energy use for 40 years before the developing nations are required to participate. There is no guarantee that these developing nations will be any more interested in curtailing their energy use then than they are now. Today, China is accelerating its use of fossil fuels, and by 2015, will likely pass the United States in total carbon emissions. Is it fair to let them off the hook now while we are subject to such stringent regulation? The Byrd-Hagel resolution would require developing nations to comply with the same regulations at the same time in the same treaty as the United States. This is not only equitable, it is the only way that there can be any real benefit to the global environment. Mr. President, the debate over global warming is tremendously important to the future of all Americans. The threat of losing 2.5 percent of our GDP will impose enormous hardships on the average consumer. The treaty is essentially an attack on America's life style. The United States has already spent more than a trillion dollars to clean the environment. American taxpayers must be assured that any new environmental programs actually provide benefits that outweigh their costs and that are grounded in sound science. At the same time, we must not enter into any international agreement that puts the United States at a significant disadvantage in the global arena. Mr. President, I believe the Global Climate Change Treaty is unacceptable as it stands at the very least it needs the Byrd-Hagel correction. I would like to thank and commend Senators Byrd and Hagel for their dedicated efforts to educate our colleagues on this issue. I appreciate their leadership and thoughtful consideration of this important international environmental issue. Thank you, Senator Byrd and Senator Hagel. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting the Byrd-Hagel resolution.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that all amendments must be offered and debated tonight and any votes ordered with respect to S. 1022 be postponed to occur beginning on 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, July 29, with 2 minutes for debate equally divided before each vote, and following the disposition of amendments, S. 1022 be advanced to third reading and a passage vote occur, all without further action or debate. I have more to this request, but I want to emphasize what that means. We will complete all of the amendments tonight. The votes on those amendments and final passage will occur next Tuesday beginning the 9:30. I further ask that if the Senate has not received the House companion bill at the time of passage of S. 1022, the bill remain at the desk; and I further ask unanimous consent that when the Senate receives the House companion bill, the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration and all after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of S. 1022, as amended, be inserted, the House bill then be read a third time and passed and the Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House and that the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees and that S. 1022 be indefinitely postponed.

Mr. LOTT. I further ask that it be in order, if necessary, for each leader to offer one relevant amendment on Tuesday prior to the scheduled 9:30 votes.

Mr. LOTT. I further ask that at 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday the Senate resume the State, Justice, Commerce appropriations bill and there be 30 minutes remaining, equally divided, for debate on each of the two amendments to be offered by Senator Wellstone.

Mr. LOTT. That is my understanding Mr. President.

Mr. LOTT. With regard to the tuna-dolphin issue, I ask unanimous consent that, at 9:30 a.m. on Friday, July 25, the Senate resume the motion to proceed to S. 39, the tuna-dolphin bill, and there be 30 minutes equally divided between Senator McCain, or his designee, and Senator Boxer. I further ask unanimous consent that following the use or yielding back of the time, the Senate proceed to the vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to S. 39.

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

Mr. LOTT. Therefore, no votes will occur during the session on Monday, July 28. Mr. President, I will yield the floor at this point and in a few minutes we will recap everything we agreed to in those unanimous- consent agreements so that they will be clear and understandable. We will do that before we go out tonight. I yield the floor. Mr. SARBANES addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I seek recognition so we can announce there will be no further rollcall votes tonight. There will be at least one vote tomorrow. And I believe that we can say there will be one vote tomorrow. It will be an important vote. We expect that that vote will be either on the tuna-dolphin issue or, more than likely, under the agreement we are going to propound, it would be on the global warming issue. So there would be a vote tomorrow. A time would have to yet be determined exactly what time that would be, but probably not before 10 o'clock in the morning. And then we hope to work out some understandings with regard to State, Justice, Commerce. And then we would probably not have final votes on that until next Tuesday, I believe it would be. So that is the point I wanted to announce. There will be at least one vote tomorrow, and no further rollcall votes tonight. We will make an announcement with regard to Monday later on, in a few minutes, or tomorrow, about the situation on Monday.