Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to proceed to the nuclear waste bill and send a cloture motion to the desk.

Mr. LOTT. In light of this agreement to conduct this cloture vote on Tuesday, April 8, I now announce that there will be no votes during the session of the Senate on Monday, April 7, the day that we return, although there will be debate on that day. I expect debate to occur on the pending motion to proceed to the nuclear waste bill on that Monday, and the Senate may be asked to consider other legislative or executive items on that Monday. I will be discussing Monday's schedule further with the Democratic leader and will inform the Senate as to what other items the Senate may consider when it reconvenes following the Easter recess period. I thank all my colleagues for their attention. I now withdraw the motion.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now turn to the consideration of Calendar No. 27, S. 104, the nuclear waste bill.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I regret the objection from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle. I know the Senator from Illinois was objecting on behalf of other Senators that could be directly affected by this issue. I have filed a cloture motion on the motion to proceed to the nuclear waste bill. So I now ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote be at 2:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 8, and the mandatory quorum under rule XXII be waived.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be granted permission to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 20, for purposes of conducting a Subcommittee on National Parks, Historic Preservation, and Recreation hearing which is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to address the future of the National Park System and to identify and discuss needs, requirements and innovative programs that will insure the Park Service will continue to meet its many responsibilities well into the next century.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, March 20, 1997, at 9:30 a.m. on ocean shipping reform.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 20, 1997, to conduct a hearing to examine the Federal Reserve's proposal to modify the ``firewalls'' that separate commercial banks and their securities affiliates.

Mr. LOTT. The Committee on Veterans' Affairs would like to request unanimous consent to hold a joint hearing with the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs to receive the legislative presentation of AMVETS, American Ex-Prisoners of War, Veterans of World War I, and the Vietnam Veterans of America. The hearing will be held on March 20, 1997, at 9:30 a.m., in room 345 of the Cannon House Office Building.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full Committee on Environment and Public Works be granted permission to meet to consider the nominations of Johnny H. Hayes, nominated by the President to be a member of the board of directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority; Judith M. Espinosa, nominated by the President to be a member of the board of trustees of the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental Policy Foundation; and D. Michael Rappoport, nominated by the President to be a member of the board of trustees of the Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental Policy Foundation Thursday, March 20, after the first Senate floor vote or at a time to be determined Thursday, March 20, in 406 Dirksen.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Rules and Administration be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, March 20, 1997, beginning at 9:30 a.m. until business is completed, to hold an oversight hearing on the operations and budget of the Congressional Research Service and the Library of Congress.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the Finance Committee requests unanimous consent to conduct a hearing on Thursday, March 20, 1997, beginning at 10 a.m. in room 215 Dirksen.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I want to express the gratitude of the Senate to Jim Grahne, the director of our Senate Recording and Photographic Studios. Jim is retiring this week after 27 years of dedicated service to the Senate. Jim Grahne has been one of our most talented technical and management professionals in the Office of the Sergeant at Arms. He is an engineer by training and profession and has used his skill, creativity and expertise to shepherd the Senate through nearly 30 years of broadcast and photographic technology. I am referring to the television, radio and photographic services on which we as members, and as an institution, so readily rely. It was Jim's leadership that made technically possible the broadcast of the proceedings of the Senate floor. While that accomplishment may be one of his professional highlights, he always sought ways to improve products and services to members. Some of the recent successes of Jim and his staff include the installation of a fiber optic network for the broadcast of committee hearings, CD-Rom and on-line photo data base services for members' offices. Jim and his staff have also pioneered the use of closed captioning text, audio and visual technologies. This year the studios released full text and audio search and retrieval of floor proceedings. Offices may now search for and download any speech or debate text and audio with 15 minutes of its being given. Our gratitude for Jim is not limited to his understanding and appreciation for technology. Because he came to the Senate from the commercial news and broadcast industry, he understands the importance of the press and of the role played by visual and sound images. Every day that the proceedings of the Senate are made available to the press here and around the world, it is an affirmation and practical example of democracy in action. That goal has been an important part of Jim's motivation. Mr. President, our Senate family wishes Jim and Linda, his wife of 34 years, and their children--Mark, Lena, and Karen--the very best and hope he gets some time to spend on that sailboat with his granddaughter, Megan. But, knowing Jim as we do, we can expect his sleeves will be rolled up and into another challenge in the very near future.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I thank the Senator.

Mr. LOTT. Will the Senator from Arkansas allow me to put a couple brief statements in the Record and make a unanimous consent request. This should not take very long at all.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, any statements relating to the nominations appear at the appropriate place in the Record, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I send an adjournment resolution to the desk calling for adjournment of the Congress for the Easter holiday.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Again, Madam President, I thank Senator Daschle for his cooperation.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I amend my unanimous-consent request to include that additional 30 minutes for the Senator from West Virginia after the vote.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I thank the Democratic leader and the Senators on both sides for the work that has been done on this. I believe now we will have a good discussion about what is or is not going on with regard to the drug battle that we are fighting, with the American Government and the Mexican Government being involved. Madam President, I believe we are able now to get a time agreement, which I think would be very helpful to all Senators to know that we are going to proceed and there will be a time specified so we can have a vote by 4 o'clock, hopefully. I discussed this with the Democratic leader and other Senators. I believe we have a reasonable agreement here. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now turn to the consideration of Calendar No. 29, House Joint Resolution 58, regarding the certification of the President with respect to Mexico and there be 4 hours 45 minutes total for debate on the resolution and an amendment, to be divided as follows: Senator Coverdell in control of 1 hour, Senator Feinstein in control of 1 hour, 1 hour under the control of the majority leader and 1 hour under the control of the Democratic leader, Senator Grassley in control of 30 minutes, and Senator Torricelli in control of 15 minutes. I further ask unanimous consent that there be one amendment in order to be offered by Senators Coverdell and Feinstein. I further ask unanimous consent that no other amendments or motions be in order, and following the conclusion or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to a vote on the amendment, to be followed by third reading and final passage of House Joint Resolution 58 without further action or debate.

Mr. LOTT. Reform legislation--it takes some time after the actual vote. So it is my intent for this issue to come up when we come back after the Easter recess. There is a statute or bill that has been introduced that we hope to get up and get a vote on. Very serious. I think good efforts are underway to deal with the parallel issues of U.N. reform. The administration is working with a bipartisan group of House and Senate Members. I think everybody is beginning to understand, themselves, and we may be able to get some reforms and some process on how we deal with what is the number we may be indebted to the United Nations for and how that ever would be addressed. We are also working with the chairman of the committee, Senator Helms, and Senator Biden, the ranking member, on this reorganization of the State Department issue. The new Secretary of State has indicated some encouraging things there, and I believe there is going to be good faith by all to try to address this issue. There are some legitimate concerns about the treaty--the verification question, search and seizure questions, how it affects different things in America. On some of those, the administration this year came back and said, ``You're right. We have some concerns about this issue.'' So a number of them have been worked out. An equal number are within the range of being worked out. Again, Senator Biden has been working with Senator Helms to address some of those concerns. There are some we just will not be able to get worked out. I mean, we will have to have votes on amendments on the floor or there will probably be a substitute. But my intention is to continue to work with all involved, including the chairman and ranking member, to get this issue to the floor in April. That is why I had our list of items. It is not my intent to stonewall or delay this. I understand that every time we go out or every time a bill comes up, the Senator from New Mexico will be up here raising questions and maybe even objections. We have other things we need to do that are equally or more important. So it is not my intention at all to allow this thing to go on indefinitely. But you do understand, as the majority leader, you work with the chairman, you help the chairman, and the chairman helps you, and you work with the ranking member. This is a place of great comity, and we want to keep that. I am trying to honor that as a majority leader who is, you know, sort of learning as I go along, making a few mistakes here and there, but getting some things done on the way, too. So I think you know from what we have been able to do over the last 8 months, I work steadily at these things, and at some point we are going to get to vote on this. I do not mean to say in the great wild blue wonder. We are working very aggressively, and I believe we are going to get a process to get it dealt with in April.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, if the Senator from New Mexico will yield. First, I would like to just briefly clarify what we have in this consent request. It is to bring up this certification issue and to allow an amendment that would put in place the agreement that was entered into last night by a bipartisan group of Senators and the administration. So this just basically sets up a process to begin the debate and get a vote on the agreement with regard to certification, with the understanding it does set out some markers as to what we think should be done, and it does require the President to report by September 1 as to the progress that is being made there. But it does not have a subsequent date where a vote could occur. This is going to be the vote on certification, or decertification, depending on your point of view. So I want to clarify what I was asking for there. With regard to the inquiry of the Senator from New Mexico, first of all, let me assure him I understand there is concern about the April 29 date and the need for some action before that date by a number of Senators. There is disagreement on how essential it is we act before the 29th. As a matter of fact, whenever the United States should ratify such a treaty, certainly we would be sort of the big kid on the block and we would be involved in the process. But there are arguments on the other side of it, and I certainly understand that. I acknowledged to the Senator from Michigan, I believe it was yesterday or the day before, that I also understand that in order to get a treaty completed and the subsequent actions that go along with it, enacting or enabling legislation----

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now turn to the consideration of Calendar No. 29, House Joint Resolution 58, regarding the certification of the President with respect to Mexico, that there be no time restraints for debate on the resolution and an amendment. Further, I ask unanimous consent that there be only one amendment in order to be offered by Senators Coverdell and Feinstein.

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I have a series of unanimous consent requests that may be necessary unless we get some agreement very quickly now from the minority leader. I just came from a committee hearing, where I just finished testifying so I could come to the floor at 10:30 and call up the agreement entered into last night after monumental efforts by Senators on both sides of the aisle, working with the administration, with regard to the Mexico certification issue regarding drugs and how the drug war is being fought with the United States Government being involved and, of course, with the Mexican Government being involved, but in ways that are very troublesome. I had hoped we could get started at 10:30, get a time agreement that was reasonable, maybe 4 hours equally divided, so we could have a full discussion about what is happening with regard to law enforcement efforts and dealing with drugs coming from Mexico into the United States, so we could talk about the President's difficult decision to go forward with certification, but also to make sure that the American people understand that the Congress is not satisfied with the status quo. More must be done. We have a right--in fact, we have an obligation--to get more from our Government's efforts in fighting the drug war and dealing with the flood of drugs that are killing America's children. They are flooding into this country from Mexico. We have a right to expect hardened drug criminals to be extradited into this country. Some of them have, some of them have not. We have a right to expect that our law enforcement people dealing with the drug barons, the drug lords, are able to defend themselves. We have a right to expect some thresholds to be met with regard to what Mexico must do and, frankly, what we must do in our Government. This is a very important issue, one that we cannot leave today or tomorrow without taking action on. I want to say how much I appreciate the great effort by the Senators here on the floor now--Senator Hutchison from Texas, Senator Coverdell from Georgia, Senator Feinstein from California, and other Senators that have worked to try to do the responsible thing. I want to point out that these Senators, along with others, for a total of 40, wrote a letter to the President of the United States saying, ``Mr. President, don't certify Mexico as doing what needs to be done in this drug battle that we are engaged in.'' The President did that. Now, the House took an action that will allow them to put down some markers and, after 90 days, look and see if progress is being made and then, perhaps, act further. I believe that is the gist of their action. That resolution is pending here at the desk. But, again, in a full, good-faith effort, the Senators have worked with the administration, which included a whole variety of people. I was stunned by all the people that got involved. The Secretary of State was involved; the head of our drug effort, General McCaffrey; the head of NSC, Sandy Berger; the Secretary of Treasury was there. It was a long list of people, and a lot of work was done. I think these Senators here gave a great deal. They wanted to say that these are some things that must be done and be certified by the President; when they are, we should have the right to have another vote on whether or not there should be decertification with waivers, or certification, or whatever. They agreed to not insist on that. But what they did do was reach an agreement that requires a report from the President, by September 1, on what is being done by our Government and by Mexico to do a better job. Now, I finally decided last night that the administration really didn't want any action by the Senate. They want us to just leave and not do anything. We can't do that. The Senate should take action on something this important. So we will act on this. We will vote. We will do it today, or we will do it tonight or tomorrow; it's OK with me. We are going to vote on this issue before we leave here. There is a process where the Democratic leader cannot stop that--it is a privileged resolution, with 10 hours of debate and then a vote. I don't want to do it that way. I want us to come to an agreement. The resolution that I thought we were going to call up at 10:30 requires specific reporting on steps taken by Mexico and the United States to combat illegal narcotics trafficking. It makes clear the Senate view that Mexico has not done enough--and they have not. We have seen that many times. We have seen it with the devastating story recently about the top drug enforcer in Mexico who, as a matter of fact, had to be removed from office because he was, in fact, being involved in what he is supposed to be trying to control. That is as gently as I can possibly put it. I fear there are going to be more devastating reports like that. The revision allowing for a vote, as I indicated, was dropped last night, after direct involvement by the Secretary of State, head of the NSC, as well as Senators here, and Senator McCain was involved in that. But it makes clear that the administration and the Government of Mexico should provide real demonstrable progress by September. If they don't, under this procedure, we would not have another vote, but we can have more votes. There will be authorization bills, and there will be appropriations bills, like the State, Justice, Commerce bill. If we don't get a response or action here, the Senate has a powerful weapon called the power of the purse. We can withhold funds. We can make our views known. Based on that, the fact that we can act in other ways with other vehicles, I thought this was a good agreement. I thought that the Senators here on the floor bent over backward to reach an agreement. Now, we have--get this picture--the Secretary of State, who is now in Helsinki, and the head of NSC, now in Helsinki, both directly involved, saying, yes, we can go with this. General McCaffrey, head of the drug administration, who was there and said, yes, we can go with this. Democrat and Republican Senators said yes. The majority leader says this is not perfect, but this is a responsible thing to do. And then what happens? There is a Democratic Caucus this morning. They meet and decide that because they can't dictate the schedule on another issue, because they can't make the majority leader give them a date certain on another unrelated issue, they want the United States Senate not to act on the drug problem in Mexico. Now, my friends, this is a big-time loser for those that are objecting to this procedure. It cannot stand. We have to find a way to move this forward. So all these administration officials are for it, Senate Republicans and Democrats are for it, and now they are saying, ``If you don't give us a guarantee on another issue, that we will do it by a date certain, we are not going to let you bring this up.'' Look, I know we like to play games just before we get to go home. But this is not the way to do serious business. We are not dealing with partisanship here. We are not dealing with some traditional authorization. We are dealing with drugs. How can we not express ourselves on this? We must, and we will. I am going to ask unanimous consent, when the minority leader arrives, to bring up Calendar No. 29, House Joint Resolution 58, regarding the certification of the President with respect to Mexico, that there be 4 hours total for debate on that resolution, to be equally divided in the usual form, and that one amendment--and only one amendment--be in order to be offered by Senators Coverdell, Feinstein, Hutchison, and others. I will ask that no other amendments or motions be in order, and following the conclusion or yielding back of the time, the Senate proceed to a vote. We can take it up, and we can have a calm, cool, nonpartisan debate on a very, very important issue. I have here the resolution that was the subject of the negotiations and the one that was agreed to last night at about 7:30 or 8 o'clock. I was around and in and out of those meetings. This was interesting, I thought, because I actually have the copy here, or a copy of what was agreed to. See that. These are circled paragraphs the administration had problems with, and the compromise language that was worked out. I don't like this compromise. But it was a responsible thing to do. The same thing on the next page. The work was so intense and so committed right up to the last minute. Here is a paragraph. It circles this, and it is out. I am going to ask for that. I hope that Senators on both sides of the aisle will agree to that. If that effort fails--and I am going to make this request not later than 11 o'clock--I hope to hear from the minority leader quickly so we can get started. If I don't get that consent, then I am going to ask unanimous consent that the Foreign Relations Committee be discharged from further consideration of Senate Joint Resolution 21 regarding the decertification--this is the decertification process, not certification; this is decertification--with additional waiver language, that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration, and that there be a limited period of time--presumably maybe 4 hours--for debate. After that, of course, we go to a vote. If that is objected to, then I am going to go to the privileged resolution, which is not amendable, provides for 10 hours of debate, and a vote. I do not want to do this. It provides for 10 hours of debate in the law. This is a privileged resolution that sets out very tightly how we would vote on this privileged resolution issue. This is dangerous. It is not good for the administration. I don't think it is good for the country because the vote that is taken would be on decertifying Mexico as being seriously involved in this drug-fighting effort with us. It might pass. And if we are going to have games played here on other unrelated issues, it puts me under extraordinary pressure. I have indicated that I do not want to vote for decertification. But I might. Also, even if it does not pass, what if the vote is 60 to 40? What does it say about the administration's effort? What does it say about the President's effort? What does it say to Mexico that 40 United States Senators voted to decertify Mexico? Then that would have to go-- unless the House just accepts that--to conference. And then here is what will be pending in conference: decertification, or 90 days of delay and a vote. Neither one of those should look very tempting to those that want to do the right thing. So I do not want to go on at length. I want us to get started. We need to get started. But I hope we can get an agreement to move forward on the agreement that was entered into last night. It is the right thing to do. It is the right thing for the Senate. It is the right thing for the administration. And, on a close call, I guess it is the right thing in our efforts to control drugs coming out of Mexico. But, Mr. President, I am in good spirits today. I understand we have to do this positioning around here. I understand you have to try to drag the majority leader into doing something he might not want to do, or cannot do. But I think this is the wrong place and the wrong time to be playing this game. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT

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