Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, again for clarification, I believe that we have worked it out so we can go back to the original request identified as Specter on NIH, Landrieu regarding defense, Collins regarding home health, and Conrad or designee regarding debt reduction. Of course, these amendments would be subject to the usual rules, and second-degree or some other agreement as to how they would finally be disposed.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I am not sure exactly who we may be trying to accommodate. But I feel compelled to want to make some remarks out of leader time, if I have to. I think the best way to do it is to extend the time to 3:15, with the time equally divided.

Mr. LOTT. I think it accommodates your interest.

Mr. LOTT. Absolutely, Madam President.

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I will try to set the example of not speaking at great length hoping others will follow. I am hoping that maybe the points I make will be sufficient without it being at great length. My colleagues, I haven't spoken about the budget resolution because we are dealing with a lot of different issues and I have been meeting with foreign dignitaries and because I have such ultimate confidence in the managers of this legislation. Senator Domenici doesn't need a speech from me or help from anybody. But we are here to be helpful. I want to make two or three points that I am really worried about. Are we fiddling around here while Rome is beginning to burn? Today, and during the last couple of days, I have been talking with people who are watching the stock market. Who knows what causes the stock market to move around? But I have also been talking to financial service managers from companies that watch very carefully what is happening in the country and in the economy. I have been talking to representatives of manufacturers. They are telling me that the economy is perhaps in more trouble than any of us want to acknowledge. I ask the question: OK, what do we do about it? Obviously, one thing is for the Federal Reserve System to do more. That is one of the places where I have over the years quite often agreed with Senator Dorgan in my exasperation sometimes with the Federal Reserve System. I am not an economist. I wouldn't presume to try to give advice to the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board or any others. But it looks to me as though instead of being overly focused on the possibility of inflation, we are entering a period of deflation-- deflation. We need the Fed to give us a little more of a hand while we bring in the cavalry with some additional help. The only two things to do when you are having sluggishness in the economy is change monetary policy or change fiscal policy. Give it a stimulus--i.e., tax relief. Everybody on both sides of the aisle has been saying: yes; let's do more. Let's do more now. Let's do it this year. Let's make sure it is going to have a greater impact in the next 2 or 3 years so the people will have confidence, and so they can keep more of their money safe and invest it, and do something about the economy. We have two choices. The Federal Reserve can do something and/or we can do something. I think it is time that we pay a little attention to trying to find a way to give this tax relief, give this fiscal boost, and do it quickly. That is my greatest concern and why I feel compelled, as I watch what is happening even today with the NASDAQ, what is happening with manufacturing jobs, and what is happening with deflation beginning to creep up on us, to say I think we have to do more. Two other points: The pattern is clear. I have been in Congress for 28 years--the same number of years as the distinguished Senator from New Mexico. Only I spent a few years--16 years--on the other side of the Capitol. What we are going to have now is amendment after amendment after amendment on both sides to add more spending--there is nothing new about that--and in areas about which I believe very strongly. Mississippi is a State with agriculture that is very important. I have always thought of myself as a heavily laden hawk when it comes to defense. But I also like to think of myself as a cheap, heavily laden hawk. We can all say we voted to spend more here or more there. That is the point. We are on the verge of everybody saying let's spend more. Let's have more for defense, education, home health care, NIH, health care in general, you name it. We get very comfortable when we start raising the level of spending. But there is an added problem to it now. One amendment after another says: Oh, and by the way, we will pay for it by taking hard-working people's money away from them, bring it to Washington, and keep it here and decide how it is going to be spent. We are taking from millions of laborers the bread that they have earned and bringing it up here. What is new? We have been doing this for years. Spend more, raise taxes, or in this case reduce, and pretty soon, if we passed every amendment that has been offered to cut the tax bill, it would be a tax increase. What is happening? I hope we will think about that and try to stop it. The amendment before us would reduce the tax cut by $448 billion and increase spending for education, and supposedly accumulate cash. But the fact is, once again, the tax relief would be reduced and more moved into education. I am not going to take a back seat to anybody when it comes to education. I am the son of a schoolteacher. I went to public schools all my life. I worked for the University of Mississippi in four different capacities before I began practicing law. I believe in public education, and quality education across the board; not just public education but choice. There is lots of variety in my area. Some of the best schools are Catholic or Episcopal schools. I feel strongly about education. But the question is, How much is enough? How can we do it all at once with a 25-percent increase, as the Senator from New Mexico was just saying? The President is asking for an increase. We are going to come back after the Easter recess, and we are going to go to an education bill which may be the most bipartisan bill of the year and which is going to have more spending in it. It is going to be thoughtful. It is going to have reform, accountability, teacher training, and all the different components. Yet here we are once again. Oh, yes, we will take out money for agriculture and from the tax relief. We will take out money for education. My colleagues, it is the same thing we have been doing over all of the years. It is time to stop it. This is the worst time to be talking about cutting down or eliminating tax relief. I spoke this morning to the heads of a couple of major companies-- J.P. Morgan and Dean Witter. I don't know what the current names are because they are so long. We talked about what we can do. What can we do? They said we support the tax relief and the sooner the better. I oppose this amendment because I think if we don't do it, we will wind up with no tax relief at the worst possible time, and we will wind up spending the entire surplus. This is a balanced package. It reduces the debt. It provides increases for defense, education, agriculture, and it provides tax relief for working Americans. There is the sign of good government in this budget resolution. Remember this: We get all overwrought about this. This is just the whistle at the beginning of the game. This allows us to go forward and decide how much we are going to put in appropriations for Interior, for Agriculture, and also the tax relief package. This allows us to just go forward to give the President a chance to have his program considered. I express my support for this package, express my appreciation to Senator Domenici, and urge the defeat of this amendment and all amendments that are going to keep trying to increase spending while cutting tax relief for working Americans. Thank you. I yield the floor. Mr. CONRAD addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I enter a motion to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was just agreed to. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, Senator Byrd has indicated he would like to have an exchange, a colloquy. This seems a good time to do it. I might say also, it would be our hope and intent now that we would go on to the next amendment. Senator Specter is ready with an amendment on NIH. So I hope we can--I talked to Senator Daschle about that--go ahead and proceed with the next amendment that was in order. I would be glad to respond to a question or a comment Senator Byrd might have.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I believe there were actually several ideas or questions propounded there. I will try to respond as directly and as briefly to them as I can so we can go forward with the next amendment that is pending. First of all, as to when to take up the issue of reconciliation and the process for giving working people tax relief to be able to keep a little bit more of their money at home, I think clearly it needs to come relatively shortly, I assume tomorrow, in whatever form it might be so that there will be ample time to discuss it fully. I know that Senators on both sides of the aisle will want to be heard on that. I must say that if we start down this trail of spending all the money, there won't be anything left for tax relief anyway so we won't need this reconciliation process. I think clearly to have tax cut in reconciliation is something that we would like to have considered and would be prepared to act on it. But as the Senator knows, we would be willing to consider doing it another way, doing it the way it was done even back in the 1980s. We have offered an idea, a unanimous consent agreement to Senator Byrd, and I have discussed it with Senator Daschle. Senators on this side have looked at that. I thought perhaps we could get something worked out on that, and we could get that done. We would have to consult with the chairman of the Finance Committee and the ranking member on the Finance Committee, make sure everybody understood how that would work and make sure that it would give us some of the important benefits that reconciliation gives you, even though it wouldn't do it that way. We will be glad to continue to work with you and with others on the possibility of doing it through a unanimous consent agreement. I have discussed this with Senator Domenici and with Senator Grassley. They are interested, willing to work on it. They just want to make sure they know what is in it, and I think everybody on both sides wants to do that. As far as the President's budget, we have the outlines of the main categories that the President is suggesting. I guess if we waited later on, we would get line by line by line. I don't think that is what a budget resolution does. A budget resolution sets the broad categories and then we go forward. Then in the Appropriations Committee, for instance, they decide how much they are going to put in there for Interior or Transportation. I don't believe the President dictates that. We have acted before when we didn't have the President's budget. As far as the idea of postponing it, there would be two or three problems with that. We had not indicated that we were thinking about doing that. We would have to check on both sides with 100 Senators to make sure that their schedules could be changed to that effect. I suspect there would be a lot of resistance to it. We would have to check with both sides of the aisle on that. Worst of all, in my opinion, we need to move forward. We need to move forward with this budget resolution--good, bad, ugly. We ought to move it on into conference and see if we can get an agreement there and then come back and vote on it so we can get on with the substantive business. This just gives us the outlines of how we can proceed and then we get into the details: What we do on Medicare, what we do on defense, and what we do on tax policy. I think we ought to go ahead. I spoke earlier about my concern about the economy and the need for us to get this process on down the road so that we can be looking at taking some action on tax policy and on substantive issues, too. I see Senator Domenici. As chairman of the Budget Committee, I don't want to try to respond to all of this. Some of it being in his jurisdiction, would he like to comment on this, too?

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize and honor Captain Will Brown, United States Navy, as he retires upon completion of over 26 years of honorable and faithful service to our nation. A native of Queens, New York, Captain Brown joined the Navy in 1975. A career Supply Officer, he began his service as the Sales Officer aboard USS GUAM, LPH-9, followed by a shore assignment at Naval Aviation Technical Training Center, Lakehurst, New Jersey. Captain Brown returned to sea as the Supply Officer aboard USS BARNEY, DDG-6, and then served as the Combat Systems Analyst at Commander, Naval Surface Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet. Following graduation from the Naval War College, he was the Director of Consumable Logistics Management on the Chief of Naval Operations Staff followed by an assignment as Director of Repairables at Naval Supply Systems Command, Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania. Captain Brown was then selected for the prestigious position of Executive Assistant to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Financial Management in Washington, DC. Following a successful tour of duty, he next reported to the Navy Office of Legislative Affairs as Congressional Liaison for Readiness Programs. Captain Brown was then chosen to serve as a senior Supply Officer onboard USS PUGET SOUND, AD- 38. Recognized for his sustained outstanding leadership and organizational skills, Captain Brown was then selected to serve as the Senior Analyst on the Department of the Navy's Organization, Management and Infrastructure Team. Returning to a position working with our nation's lawmakers, Captain Brown was handpicked to serve as Director of the Naval Programs Division, Navy Office of Legislative Affairs. In this capacity he was a major asset to the Navy, Marine Corps, and Congress and has been considered a valued advisor to the very top echelons of the Navy and Congress. His consummate leadership and integrity ensured that Naval programs were appropriate, understood, and well communicated. A role model and mentor to those who worked for and with him, he made his impact on people as well as programs. Through his brilliant insight and dedication, he directly contributed to the future readiness of the United States Navy and this nation. Captain Brown's distinguished awards include the Legion of Merit, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Navy Commendation Medal, the Navy Achievement Medal, the Sea Service Ribbon, Battle ``E'' Ribbon, Navy Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Navy Unit Commendation. The Department of the Navy, the Congress, and the American people have been defended and well served by this dedicated naval officer for over 26 years. Captain Will Brown will long be remembered for his leadership, service and dedication. He will be missed. We wish Will, and his lovely wife Phyllis, our very best as they begin a new chapter in their life together.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I now move to proceed to H. Con. Res. 83, the House budget resolution, and my motion to proceed be limited to 10 minutes--5 minutes under the control of Senator Conrad and 5 minutes under the control of Senator Domenici--and, following that debate, the Senate proceed to the adoption of the motion and that the motion to reconsider then be laid upon the table.

Mr. LOTT. In light of this agreement, then, Mr. President, there will be no further votes today. However, votes will occur throughout the day and into the evening tomorrow and probably Wednesday and Thursday also. I thank my colleagues for helping work out this agreement. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

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

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, we have been prepared for 2 months now to have this full debate and votes on amendments, and to actually get to a conclusion. Senator McCain and I have talked, and Senator McConnell and I have talked, and the agreement all along was that we would have amendments, full debate for 2 weeks, and then we would go to a conclusion. I assure the Senate that we are going to do that. We can do it tonight at a reasonable hour, we can do it at midnight, or Friday, Saturday, or Sunday. But I think we have a responsibility to complete action on this bill. I hope the concern I have now that maybe amendments are going to start multiplying when, in fact, there are no more than one or two amendments that really are still critical that are out there to be offered and debated and voted on--maybe there are more. And I don't want to demean any Senator's amendment, but we have been on this now for the agreed-to almost 2 weeks. Anybody who thinks that by just beginning to drag this out and coming up with more amendments, we will carry it over until next week, that is not going to be the case. Everybody has labored--sometimes with difficulty--to be fair with each other and give this thing a full airing and get some results, and you can debate about whether they are good or bad as long as you want to. At some point, we have to vote and move on. We have very serious problems in this country. We need to address them. We have to pass a budget resolution. We have to take into consideration the needs of the country in terms of funding for programs, whether it is education, agriculture, defense, health care. We need to take whatever actions we can to provide confidence and a boost in job security and the economy. We have an energy crisis that will not go away. We need to get on to those issues. Again, not to demean this issue at all--it is very important--but we will have done what we promised to do, and now it is time we begin to look for the conclusion and be prepared to move on to other issues next week. I just wanted to remind Senators on both sides of our discussion and my commitment to follow up with the agreement.

Mr. LOTT. Yes.

Mr. LOTT. I thank Senator McCain. That discussion was not just between Senator McCain and me, but also with the Democratic leader, Senator Feingold--we were all in the loop. We all had an understanding of how we would bring this to an eventual conclusion.

Mr. LOTT. I am glad to yield to Senator McConnell.

Mr. LOTT. Can I inquire of Senator Dodd, does he have any idea what might be outstanding and when we can move to a conclusion on this legislation?

Mr. LOTT. I want everybody to understand that I am prepared to do that, too. Instead of that being a threat, it is a promise, No. 1, but No. 2, it is to urge Senators to work with the managers to identify the amendments we are going to have to consider, and if it can be done by voice vote, let us get time agreements on them. We should be prepared to move to table, if that is what is required, too. We have an opportunity to make progress and complete this bill. We are going to do that. I want to make sure everybody understands it, so everybody needs to start making plans, if we are going to have to stay here Friday and Saturday, and take actions to allow that to happen.

Mr. LOTT. I will be glad to yield to Senator Reid.

Mr. LOTT. I say to Senator Reid, he always does good work, not just with Senator Dodd but with this side, too. He is an ombudsman for us all. We do not want to cut off anybody, but all I am saying is we are going to complete this bill this week and everybody needs to know that. If we go into Friday, Saturday, or Sunday, I only have one commitment, and I really did not want to do it anyway, so I will be delighted to stay here. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT. Actually, it is in a State other than my home State.