Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. You were just announcing the intention with regard to how to proceed? The UC was to allow Senator Byrd to offer a modification, and then I believe the Senator just wanted 30 seconds to speak?

Mr. LOTT. I withdraw my reservation.

Mr. LOTT. Reserving the right to object, I believe there has been a modification.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, today I rise to pay tribute to Sharon Zelaska, who is retiring after serving for over 4 years in the demanding position of Assistant Secretary of the Senate, and who has contributed so much to the efficient operations of the Senate over those years. She arrived in 1997, a stranger to the Senate but not to Capitol Hill, having worked for a dozen years previously as executive assistant to then Representative Jack Kemp. As Assistant Secretary she has been responsible for the day-to-day operations of the office of Secretary of the Senate, no small task given that 24 departments report to the Secretary. Working closely with Secretary of the Senate Gary Sisco, she helped provide the best possible service to all one hundred senators individually, and to the Senate as an institution. Since the post of Assistant Secretary was historically that of Chief Clerk, Sharon Zelaska had a chair on the rostrum specifically designated for her. She took that chair on ceremonial occasions, but on most days her real work was behind-the-scenes, managing the many departments within the Secretary's office. As Assistant Secretary she spent countless hours working with senators and staff. Her door was open to every one to stop in for a cup of coffee and an opportunity to talk about important issues of the day. When department heads retired, new candidates needed to be interviewed and selected. Vouchers required signing, payrolls had to be adjusted, e-mail answered, and no end of paperwork completed. She did all that with a poise and sense of fairness that all who worked with her admired and will miss with her retirement. I want to take this opportunity to thank Sharon Zelaska for all her contributions to the Senate over the past 4 years and to wish her Godspeed for a happy future in a well-earned retirement.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, this Friday is graduation day for the Senate pages. These young men and women are some of the hardest working employees of the Senate. They have a grueling schedule. Many people don't know that the pages go to school from 6:00 a.m. until the Senate opens, and are here even past the time the Senate gavels out. In the past few weeks we have had several late evenings, sometimes not leaving until after midnight. While most of the Senate employees go home and go to sleep, the pages do not. After work the pages have homework and studying to do. Their work is never done. They do an invaluable service for the United States Senate and get little acclaim. However the experience is extraordinary and one they will remember for the rest of their lives. Over the past semester the pages have been witness to several historical events. The State of the Union, the passing of the largest tax cut in history and being a part of an evenly divided Senate. I would like to take this opportunity to recognize each page and the State that they represent. Republicans: Kendall Fitch, South Carolina; Jackie Grave, Missouri; Elizabeth Hansen, Utah; Joshua Hanson, Indiana; JeNel Holt, Alaska; Adrian Howell, Mississippi; Eddie McGaffigan, Virginia; Mary Hunter (Mae) Morris, Alabama; Jennifer Ryan, Idaho; Megan Smith, Kentucky; O. Dillion Smith, Vermont; Garrett Young, New Hampshire; Democrats: Libby Benton, Michigan; Steve Hoffman, Vermont; Alexis Gassenhuber, Wisconsin; Kelsey Walter, South Dakota; Michael Henderson, South Dakota; Kathryn Bangs, South Dakota; Tristan Butterfield, Montana; Lyndsey Williams, Illinois; Joshua Baca, New Mexico; Andrew Smith, Texas. Congratulations to you all on a successful semester as a Senate page. We wish you the best of luck as you encounter all future challenges. Thank you for your patronage and service to the U.S. Senate.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I send a resolution to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider and move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send another resolution to the desk and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, let me first join Senator Daschle in expressing my personal appreciation and great admiration to Senator Thurmond, for the job he has done for so many years for the people of South Carolina and, yes, the people of America. Today he is with the President of the United States, in Bedford, VA, for the dedication of a memorial to those who lost their lives in Normandy. As our colleagues know, Senator Thurmond landed at Normandy and served so honorably there. The energy and strength he exhibited in Normandy continues to this very day in the Senate. He is a legend in his own time. We all admire him and appreciate him so much. Also, I congratulate Senator Byrd for assuming this position of President pro tempore of the Senate. He certainly is going to need no briefing on the rules. He is the paragon regarding the rules of the Senate. He is the guardian of the rules. He certainly knows the rules, and he will administer them fairly and reside in the chair in a way we all will appreciate and admire. So to you, Senator Byrd and Mr. President, thank you for what you have done and what I know you will do as President pro tempore of the Senate. I also thank our staff members. There are so many people to recognize who have served the Senate during the period of time I have been majority leader. The officers, those who are here day in and day out, into the night, do such a great job for the Senate, for the Senators, and for our country. To all of you, I express my appreciation. I particularly express appreciation to our staff assistants, Elizabeth Letchworth, who has been secretary of the majority, now secretary of the minority; and to Marty Paone, who has served as secretary of the minority and will be secretary of the majority. They have the answers that we need in the Senate. We can always rely on them as to what the schedule may be, based on what the leaders have told them, and when the votes will occur. They do so much to make our life and our job easier. But primarily I want to extend my congratulations to my partner and also my friend, Tom Daschle, as majority leader. I also extend to him my hand of continued friendship and commitment to work with him for the interests of the American people. I know he will do an excellent job. I think he has set a very positive tone in his opening remarks and I told him so when I congratulated him as we shook hands. We have worked together over the past 5 years when I have been the majority leader, through some good times and some tremendous legislative achievements and through some tough times. Sometimes we have been criticized for that, but most of the time I think people understood we maintained a working relationship and we did the best we could as we saw our jobs and what we thought was right for the Senate and right for the American people. The good times we will remember and try to repeat. The bad times have already been forgotten. But there have been clear examples of where we have worked together in a bipartisan way for the interests of the American people. It covers the gamut. It has been on financial issues, on transportation, and on trade. There have been times when we had opposition in our own parties, but we came together because we thought a result was very important. I know Senator Daschle will find, sometimes, the weight of this job will be as heavy as the weight of the Earth Atlas carried on his shoulders. I hope on occasion I can help make that weight a little lighter. Of course, at some point, he tricked Hercules into assuming that burden, and Atlas was at last relieved of the weight of the world. I know how he felt. I mention this by way of congratulating Senator Daschle on his assuming the august responsibilities that come with being the majority leader of the U.S. Senate. Perhaps I should mention the remainder of that old story: Hercules managed to trick Atlas, so the poor giant wound up, once again, carrying the Earth as he was fated to do. There probably is a moral in there somewhere about how things not only change, but keep on changing. Things certainly have changed for the better since the American people elected Republican majorities to the Senate and the House in 1995. Back then, deficits stretched further than the eye could see, and Social Security was used as a government piggy bank. The welfare system hurt more people than it helped, high taxes prevented families from enjoying the fruits of their labor, and military readiness was seriously in question. Those problems were magnified by a bureaucracy that diverted education dollars from our children's classrooms, putting their futures at risk. Today, our hard work enables us to boast of a different story--the story of how Republican initiatives have made a difference by changing things for the better: Republicans became the catalyst for balancing the budget. We stopped the raid on Social Security. We moved people from welfare to the dignity and independence of work. We lowered taxes for families and for job creation. We began to restore America's military strength. And, we returned education dollars to parents, teachers and communities. The result? A record-setting economy, higher-paying jobs, record low interest rates, greater investment, more opportunity, and more parents involved in schools. Many landmark achievements were accomplished through bipartisan cooperation: the balanced budget, welfare reform, the Soldiers' Bill of Rights, juvenile justice reform, education reform, safe drinking water, a minimum wage increase combined with small business tax relief, and ISTEA--the legislation that is dramatically modernizing our transportation infrastructure, Air 21, and financial services modernization. Add to that our defense modernization, the Caribbean Basin Initiative, the Africa Free Trade bill, and telecommunications reform. We accomplished many difficult things together in a bipartisan way--in good times, as well as in seemingly impossible times of gridlock. I am hopeful that there will be more of those good times when we can do so again. I know that the distinguished majority leader does not need any advice on this occasion. But I do remember that I never believed as majority leader I could work my will with the Senate, unless it was a coalition of wills. From the very first, I have never gotten all that I asked for: I certainly did not get all the tax cuts we wanted for the American people. But I accepted what we could get and determined to come back and try again for more the next time. It is true that Senate Democrats will now set the schedule for this body. But any group of 49 Senators is an exceptionally strong minority. Each of those Senators looks forward to exercising all the rights of the minority to advance President Bush's and the people's agenda in the months ahead. We will be vigilant in protecting and improving social security and medicare. We will craft an energy policy to respond to the crisis that threatens our economy and qualify of life. We will create the world's best schools by empowering local school districts which are accountable to parents. Too much money still is being wasted in Washington's education bureaucracy. We will confirm the President's nominations to enable him to run the government he was elected to administer and to provide for a fair and impartial judiciary. We will work to rebuild our nation's defenses because our military is still stretched way too thin for comfort in a dangerous world. Finally, taxes are still too high, and there is still too much waste in Federal spending. We will continue to work to bring both under control. Our minority status in the Senate--albeit temporary--neither dampens our enthusiasm for building upon our successes, nor excuses us from embracing the challenges ahead. For we did not come to Washington to be caretakers of power. We were sent to the Senate for a specific purpose, as reflected in President Bush's agenda, to: move America forward again by putting people back in charge of their own country; promote economic growth; give all individuals the opportunities to reach for their dreams; strengthen our bedrock institutions of family, school, and neighborhood; and make the United States a stronger leader for peace, freedom, and progress abroad. For too long, government has supported itself by taking more of what people earn, preventing them from getting ahead, no matter how hard they work. President Reagan called it ``economics without a soul'' and taught us that the size of the federal budget is not an appropriate barometer of social conscience or charitable concern. And that is why the ultimate goal in everything we are working with President Bush to do is to give this economy back to the American people. Some say it is dangerous to push for dramatic reforms in a period of economic instability. But I believe it is dangerous not to. There may not always be an opportunity. Along with all my fellow Republicans, I say: Our goals have not changed. Neither has our resolve to rally around President Bush to meet them. Our opportunity is today. To my friends on the other side of the aisle: We are here and ready to go to work for the people who elected us to represent them. Now we have a challenge before us that is different for me and will be different for Senator Daschle. Can we come together? Can we find a way to work with this President, President Bush, and find common ground even on the bill that is pending before us now, education? We have said we want education reform and we want a responsible increase in education spending. The American people said they want it, people in every State, as did the President, and so do we. Yet we have not gotten it done. Can we come together on education? I think we can. It is going to take work. It is going to take some sacrifice. Senator Kennedy is going to continue to push it aggressively, and he is probably going to have to cast votes he doesn't particularly like, and so am I, and so will Senator Gregg. But can we do any less? Can we afford not to, finally, make progress on education reform and take some steps for the Federal Government to be of help in improving education in America? I believe we can do it. It may take a little more time, but that will be our first test. I pledge to work with the managers and with Senator Daschle to make that happen. We have a lot of other important issues we are going to have to deal with this year. Senator Daschle noted yesterday we have 13 appropriations bills and supplemental appropriations bills to do to keep the Government operating, and we have 59 days--estimated I guess-- to get it done. It is going to take a pretty good lift. I hope we don't have 100 amendments on every appropriations bill, as we had last year. I hope we can find a way to show fiscal restraint and get these bills done. Obviously, there are going to be health-related issues. How do we deal with Patients' Bill of Rights? How can we deal with this important question of prescription drugs, to make sure elderly poor get the help they need? Can we come together on Medicare reform? Can we take the lead from Senator Moynihan, the former Senator from New York, on Social Security? Will we be able to really address the energy needs of this country? Will we be taking partisan positions and trying to assess blame? Will we be trying to find how little we can do or can we come together and have a real national energy policy that will, hopefully, help this year but, more importantly, will make sure we do not have this problem in 5 years or 10 years? Defense continues to be something on which we are going to have to focus. So we have a full agenda. I do not think a lot will change. Senator Daschle will get recognized. He will be the majority leader, and I will be minority leader, the Republican leader. He will call up the bills, and we will take advantage of our rights in the minority to offer amendments, as certainly the other side has. Sometimes we will offer substitutes. But we commit and pledge our best efforts to finding a way to make it work and to pass important legislation to address these issues and find the solutions that are needed by the American people. It is not about personalities. I still believe that government is about ideas, about issues. So it is not really that important in what role we serve. What is important is what do we do for the people we serve, what legacy will we leave for the next generation. I believe we can get it done. We have a lot of work to do. Let's get started. I again pledge to you my support and cooperation, Senator Daschle. I yield the floor. (Applause, Senators rising.)

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the Senate will be in a period of morning business just for 30 minutes or so now. Then we will recess for the weekly policy luncheons to meet. When the Senate reconvenes at 2:15, the education bill will be the pending business. There are a number of pending amendments of significant import. I am sure there will be debate and, hopefully, at least a couple of votes this afternoon, and that we will be able to continue tomorrow, and as long as it takes, to get this very important education reform package completed. We still have some 300 amendments pending. I would assume that 30 or 40 of those would have to be considered in some form and voted on, maybe even more. So I hope we can make progress on this important legislation today and get an agreement to proceed with it later on this week, no matter what the circumstances may be. We will clarify that schedule later on today or first thing in the morning. I thank my colleagues for their cooperation. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Thank you very much, Mr. President.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I extend our special appreciation to our guest Chaplain this morning for the beautiful and most appropriate prayer. We are delighted to have Dr. Foth here.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. It is Saturday, May 26, Memorial Day weekend, a special weekend for recognizing those who have sacrificed so much for our country. The Chaplain is right: Everyone does count. That is why Senators are here. We are doing the American people's business. Later on today we hope to complete action on a very significant piece of legislation, tax relief for all Americans. The Senate will be in a short period of morning business awaiting the conference report to accompany the tax reconciliation bill. I see Senator Specter is in the Chamber ready to speak in morning business. The House is currently voting on the conference report. Therefore, we expect to receive the papers shortly. When the papers arrive, it is hoped that we can enter into a short time agreement so that a final vote can be set. I have already spoken briefly to Senator Daschle, and we will be working together to get an agreement on a reasonable period of time for debate. Of course, we will try to accommodate Senators who will be coming in and others who will be wanting to leave. We do plead with all Senators to give us your best measure of cooperation because we are trying to be sensitive to all kinds of special events, including graduation ceremonies and weddings and commitments of longstanding. It is not always easy to accommodate them all. I know some Senators are agitated that they have already been inconvenienced, and for that we apologize. But I commend the leadership on both sides of the aisle. We have said to each other, let's stay; let's get this done; and we are going to do that. We will notify the Senators as soon as an agreement can be entered into as to the time sequence. We are hoping we can get something that could get to a vote either before noon or hopefully by 1 o'clock. That is not agreed to, by any means, but that is the goal we are pursuing. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed in executive session.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, pursuant to the provisions of S. Res. 8, I now move to discharge the Judiciary Committee of the nomination of Ted Olson, to be Solicitor General of the United States.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I note that the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Senator Hatch, is here and ready to proceed. Therefore, I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the history of the geographic expansion of our great Nation is closely tied to the development of our network of railroad lines. Cities and towns sprang up and grew around the railroad tracks that provided transportation vital to their survival and economic future. While the development of modern automobiles, trucks and airplanes have provided alternate forms of transportation, railroads still fulfill important cargo and passenger transportation requirements across the Nation. However, in many cities and towns across our country, the increased need for motor vehicle transportation, and the road infrastructure to facilitate it, have led to increasing conflicts between railroads, motor vehicles, and people for the use of limited, and increasingly congested, space in downtown areas. Highway-rail grade crossings, even properly marked and gated ones, increase the risk of fatal accidents. Many rail lines cut downtown areas in half while serving few, if any, rail customers in the downtown area. Heavy rail traffic can cut off one side of a town to vital emergency services, including fire, police, ambulance, and hospital services. Downtown rail corridors can hamper economic development by restricting access to bisected areas. This situation is not the fault of the railroads. They own and have invested heavily to maintain their existing rail lines. These conflicts are due to economic and technological changes that occur faster and more easily than railroads can economically adjust. In 1998, the Congress enacted a landmark surface transportation bill, called TEA-21. While TEA-21 provides some flexibility in the use of the Highway Trust Fund to enable States to address some of these concerns, it is primarily focused on solving transportation problems by building or modifying roads, including road overpasses and underpasses, as it should be. However, in many situations, this highway-rail conflict can not, or should not, be fixed by cutting off or modifying a roadway. The answer is often to relocate the rail line. I know of at least five such situations in my home State of Mississippi, so there must be many more in other States. To address this need, I, along with Senator Kerry, today introduce the Community Rail Line Relocation Assistance Act of 2001. The bill would authorize the Secretary of Transportation to provide grants to States or communities to pay for the costs of relocating a rail line where this solution makes the most sense. In those cases where the best solution is to build a railroad tunnel, underpass, or overpass, or even reroute the rail line around the downtown area, this bill will enable these cities and towns to afford to undertake such a significant infrastructure project. Our bill would authorize grants to fund rail line relocation projects that: (1) mitigate the adverse effects of rail traffic on safety, motor vehicle traffic flow, or economic development; (2) involve a lateral or vertical relocation of the rail line in lieu of the closing of a grade crossing or the relocation of a road; and (3) provide at least as much benefit over the economic life of the project as the cost of the project. The DOT would fund 90 percent of the cost of these rail line relocation projects out of the general fund of the Treasury. The State or local government would be required to pay the remaining 10 percent, but would be allowed to cover this cost through appropriate in-kind contributions or dedicated private contributions. In awarding these grants, the Secretary of Transportation would have to consider: (1) the ability of the State or community to fund the project without Federal assistance; (2) the equitable treatment of various regions of the country; (3) that at least 50 percent of the available funding be spent on projects costing less than $50 million; and (4) that not more than 25 percent of the available funding may be spent on any single project. The bill would authorize $250 million in grants during the first year, and $500 million over each of the following five years. I understand that some may ask ``why don't the railroads pay for these relocation costs?'' As I noted earlier, the railroad has the right of way and has no legal obligation to move. However, I know the railroads to be concerned about maintaining good relations with the communities they serve and pass through. They want to cooperate in solving this problem. That is why the Association of American Railroads and the Short Line and Regional Railroad Association support this bill. The bill is also supported by the Railway Progress Institute and the National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association. This proposal has been enthusiastically received by several State and local government associations, and I hope to have their endorsements of the bill soon. I ask my Senate colleagues to review the needs of their own States and support this bill and I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, the history of the geographic expansion of our great Nation is closely tied to the development of our network of railroad lines. Cities and towns sprang up and grew around the railroad tracks that provided transportation vital to their survival and economic future. While the development of modern automobiles, trucks and airplanes have provided alternate forms of transportation, railroads still fulfill important cargo and passenger transportation requirements across the Nation. However, in many cities and towns across our country, the increased need for motor vehicle transportation, and the road infrastructure to facilitate it, have led to increasing conflicts between railroads, motor vehicles, and people for the use of limited, and increasingly congested, space in downtown areas. Highway-rail grade crossings, even properly marked and gated ones, increase the risk of fatal accidents. Many rail lines cut downtown areas in half while serving few, if any, rail customers in the downtown area. Heavy rail traffic can cut off one side of a town to vital emergency services, including fire, police, ambulance, and hospital services. Downtown rail corridors can hamper economic development by restricting access to bisected areas. This situation is not the fault of the railroads. They own and have invested heavily to maintain their existing rail lines. These conflicts are due to economic and technological changes that occur faster and more easily than railroads can economically adjust. In 1998, the Congress enacted a landmark surface transportation bill, called TEA-21. While TEA-21 provides some flexibility in the use of the Highway Trust Fund to enable States to address some of these concerns, it is primarily focused on solving transportation problems by building or modifying roads, including road overpasses and underpasses, as it should be. However, in many situations, this highway-rail conflict can not, or should not, be fixed by cutting off or modifying a roadway. The answer is often to relocate the rail line. I know of at least five such situations in my home State of Mississippi, so there must be many more in other States. To address this need, I, along with Senator Kerry, today introduce the Community Rail Line Relocation Assistance Act of 2001. The bill would authorize the Secretary of Transportation to provide grants to States or communities to pay for the costs of relocating a rail line where this solution makes the most sense. In those cases where the best solution is to build a railroad tunnel, underpass, or overpass, or even reroute the rail line around the downtown area, this bill will enable these cities and towns to afford to undertake such a significant infrastructure project. Our bill would authorize grants to fund rail line relocation projects that: (1) mitigate the adverse effects of rail traffic on safety, motor vehicle traffic flow, or economic development; (2) involve a lateral or vertical relocation of the rail line in lieu of the closing of a grade crossing or the relocation of a road; and (3) provide at least as much benefit over the economic life of the project as the cost of the project. The DOT would fund 90 percent of the cost of these rail line relocation projects out of the general fund of the Treasury. The State or local government would be required to pay the remaining 10 percent, but would be allowed to cover this cost through appropriate in-kind contributions or dedicated private contributions. In awarding these grants, the Secretary of Transportation would have to consider: (1) the ability of the State or community to fund the project without Federal assistance; (2) the equitable treatment of various regions of the country; (3) that at least 50 percent of the available funding be spent on projects costing less than $50 million; and (4) that not more than 25 percent of the available funding may be spent on any single project. The bill would authorize $250 million in grants during the first year, and $500 million over each of the following five years. I understand that some may ask ``why don't the railroads pay for these relocation costs?'' As I noted earlier, the railroad has the right of way and has no legal obligation to move. However, I know the railroads to be concerned about maintaining good relations with the communities they serve and pass through. They want to cooperate in solving this problem. That is why the Association of American Railroads and the Short Line and Regional Railroad Association support this bill. The bill is also supported by the Railway Progress Institute and the National Railroad Construction and Maintenance Association. This proposal has been enthusiastically received by several State and local government associations, and I hope to have their endorsements of the bill soon. I ask my Senate colleagues to review the needs of their own States and support this bill and I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider that vote and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, parliamentary inquiry: Do we have an agreement to be in morning business?

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, even though the distinguished managers of this legislation have just left the Chamber, I want to say once again, as I have earlier, I think we should congratulate our two managers, the chairman of the Finance Committee, Senator Grassley, and the ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee, Max Baucus. They have done yeoman's work. There are a lot of us who say that the chairman and ranking member of committees should always reach out and try to work together and find a way to have a bipartisan agreement. In this case, these two gentlemen have done it. Perhaps there is not a total happiness with their agreement on either side. But this is the way it should work. I think they have come up with a good package and they should be commended. We didn't set a record with a number of votes on a package of this nature, but we did do 54 votes on amendments. We went through a lot of hours, having votes basically every 15 minutes. We stayed right with it. They are exhausted, but they are also exhilarated, as they should be, because this is a real good day's work. I know this legislation is going to be good for America, good for job security, and economic growth for working families of America and for their children. It does have the core components the President asked for but also other areas, such as education, pension savings, and the alternative minimum tax. So they have done good work, and I am glad we have passed this tax relief package. They now have to go to conference and that, too, will be a challenge. I am sure they are up to it, and they are going to work to make sure the interested parties in the House and the Senate, on both sides of the aisle, are included. So this has been a real lift to get it completed. I know it has been difficult on both sides of the aisle. I know Senator Reid has been here through the long hours--12 hours, I believe, yesterday alone. Senator Daschle and I talked many times to try to find a way to bring it to a conclusion. We have been able to achieve that. The vote speaks for itself; 62 Senators voted aye for tax relief for America. I am very happy that this hurdle has been jumped and now we go to the final stage. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I see other Senators who are here to speak on behalf of former Senate Majority Leader Howard Baker to be Ambassador to Japan. I will not be too long. I am delighted to have this opportunity. I think this is such a great selection for this very important position as Ambassador to Japan. I feel a personal relationship with Howard Baker for a lot of reasons. First of all, I think Howard Baker was the first live Republican I actually saw up close in my life. When I was growing up in Pascagoula, MS, there was none. Then I had the good fortune of going to the great center of learning, Oxford, MS. There I saw this outstanding and very calming and articulate spokesman, Howard Baker, on Memphis television. I was impressed. And he was a Republican. I started listening to him and watching him and had occasion to meet him one time when he came down to the university. Of course, this outstanding man from a small town in Tennessee ran for the Senate. He didn't go through the State legislature and through the House of Representatives and eventually to the Senate. He went straight to the Senate. Of course, it is of interest that his mother and his father had also served in the House of Representatives. I believe his mother had been the sheriff of the county in Tennessee. I think that is accurate. He had a pedigree of knowledge, the people of Tennessee and of governments. So it was a natural for him to go straight to the Senate. His wife, of course, was the daughter of Everett Dirksen. He of the melodious voice, a legend in his own time, his portrait hangs on the majority leader's conference wall. He had that influence. Immediately, he drew attention and respect. Immediately, he started to seek leadership in the Senate. He was not successful the first time. I think the Senator from Alaska can remember the details of that. He very quickly, comparatively speaking, became the leader of the Republicans of the Senate and then of course, in 1980, after the election, became the majority leader. I remember watching him from my perch on the House side of the Capitol as the Republican whip at the time and having meetings with him in his room where he always had the fireplace going. I was always impressed. There were a couple of difficult issues with which we had to deal--the settling of AWAC, the Panama Canal. I can remember not agreeing with the position he took on at least one of those. I watched how masterful he was. I remember coming over and watching one of the votes. We were standing in the back of the Chamber. As I recall, he sat on the corner of the table, and it seemed to have an influence on voters just because he was sitting there. Though both those motions prevailed, and they were in many ways unpopular, I remember sending him a handwritten note at the time how impressed I was at how he pulled those issues together in a bipartisan way. Soft spoken; intellectual, actually. A lot of people would be surprised that an intellectual could rise to that kind of position, but he did. Now I have an even greater respect for his leadership since I have for the past 5 years been able to serve as majority leader. I remember telling my immediate predecessor, Bob Dole: I thought your job was a piece of cake. Why wasn't it that way when I got here? This job is a challenge, every day. You have people who disagree with you around you, your friends on both sides of the aisle, and you try to give some direction to get some result. I truly now have a renewed and greater respect for the majority leader and the majority leader's position, and for Howard Baker in particular. Of course, he went on to run for President. In fact, I think almost every majority leader except George Mitchell and Trent Lott have been candidates for President. I might note, none of them has been successful, although Lyndon Johnson did manage to come in sort of through the back door, after being selected to be Vice President. He did a wonderful job. Then he showed even greater wisdom. He said: I've done that job; I'm out of here. And he went back to the private sector. And did he disappear into the hills of Tennessee? No, though that is where he seeks refuge to this very day. He went into the private sector, went to a law firm. He is involved and thoughtful. He returned to public service as Chief of Staff to President Reagan. Probably his greatest stroke of recent years is his marriage to the fine former Senator from Kansas, Nancy Kassebaum. What a duo that is. Just a year or so ago in our continuing Leader's Lecture Series, Howard Baker was one of the speakers. It was extremely interesting. He gave us a Baker's dozen of suggestions of being in the Senate. That is 13, for those who are not from the South or who don't know a baker's dozen is 13. It was a great list, and he did a wonderful job. Now he has been selected for this position. I received a call a couple weeks ago from none other than Senator Byrd who said: This is our colleague. We know him well. He was our majority leader. He wasn't just a member or just a leader; he was majority leader at a very tough, difficult time. He worked with Senator Byrd across the aisle. We don't have to wait for weeks or months for an investigation. We know this man. Let's move it. Let's expedite it. The committee had its hearing today, and the Senate will vote tonight. We will vote to confirm Howard Baker, and he will be an Ambassador, very similar to the ones who have preceded him, former Majority Leader Mike Mansfield and former Speaker of the House Tom Foley. Japan, I hope, recognizes and appreciates that we send them as our Ambassador the very best. That tradition continues with Howard Baker. I am delighted we are moving expeditiously. We will get this confirmation done. Senator Baker and his helpmate, Senator Kassebaum, will be great diplomats for America. They will be a tremendous asset for all who get to know him in Japan. I thank all of my Senate colleagues for agreeing to move this nomination expeditiously. I invite Senator Baker to join us in about an hour and a half to hear the next Leader's Lecture presentation from former President of the Senate, former House Member, Gerald Ford.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I ask for the yeas and nays on the pending amendment.

Mr. LOTT. I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.