Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, as always, it is good to see you present and ready for a new beginning. I think we have a new opportunity in this 107th Congress. Again, I extend appreciation to our Chaplain for the spiritual leadership he provides to the Senate, all Senators and our Senate family. I see the distinguished Democratic whip, Senator Reid from Nevada, is on the floor also ready to go to work. I appreciate the work he did in the last Congress and look forward to working with him this year. We are now at a stage in our country's history where we will be able to take a new look at what we want to do for the benefit of all of our people. We have completed the election, we have completed the inauguration, and now we begin to get down to business. I am pleased today that we will have an opportunity to go down with leaders of both parties from both the House and the Senate to meet with the new President to begin to discuss the agenda and how he would like to proceed and how we would like to proceed in our own way. Schedule This is the first day for bills to be introduced. The Senate will then have a period of morning business until 3 p.m. for the purpose of general statements, most of them, of course, with respect to the bills introduced. As previously announced, there will be no rollcall votes today. Votes, if necessary can be expected during this week's session regarding the confirmation of the President's Cabinet nominees. Senators will be notified as votes are scheduled. I expect there could be a vote or two scheduled on Tuesday, perhaps also on Wednesday, but we will give Members specifics on that once we have had an opportunity to consult with leaders on the Democratic side of the aisle. I also thank all the Senators for their willingness to allow us to move seven of the President's nominees through confirmation on Saturday. There had been some indication that perhaps recorded votes would be necessary, but after a great deal of working back and forth and the fact that Senator Daschle was willing to be supportive of moving the nominees through quickly, we were able to get that done. I think that was a wise decision on behalf of myself and I know the new President is glad six members of his team have already been sworn in and the seventh will probably be sworn in today, especially those dealing with national security issues, economic issues, and even the new Energy Secretary who will have to immediately begin to address some of the energy needs in this country. I think we are off to a good start. We will have the first 30 minutes I believe on this side of the aisle, and then the second 30 minutes goes to the Democratic side. Traditionally, we introduce the first five, the majority party introduces the first five, and then the other side does the next five, and back on this side for five more, and back to the other side. Then any Senators who wish would be able to offer their bills after that. I notice the Senator standing. Before I go further, I am happy to yield to Senator Reid.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I concur with the assessment of the majority leader, Senator Daschle. The unique circumstances presented by this historic 50-50 Senate created significant challenges in organizing the Senate, and those circumstances required both sides to compromise. Having both met with our respective conferences, we both have discovered the potential need in the future to revisit some of the items contained in this agreement. I think it is fair to say that we will deal with the new issues in good faith as they arise. After a great deal of effort, Senator Daschle and I have found a way to, in essence, meet half way. That is what this resolution does.

Mr. LOTT. The majority leader has described the resolution accurately. I would add only that it is my hope and expectation that tie votes in committee will be the exception and not the norm in this Congress, and that the discharge provisions of the resolution will rarely if ever have to be used. Given the unique nature of this 50-50 Senate, and the closely-divided nature of the country, it is my hope that committee chairmen and ranking members will strive to achieve strong, bipartisan majorities for all legislation and nominations considered in their committees, and that all Senators will work together in that spirit. Senator Daschle and I agree that this represents the wisest approach and will give us the best chance of success in addressing the needs of the American people. With respect to the ratios of members on conferences, we both understand that under previous Senate practices, those ratios are suggested by the majority party and if not acceptable by the minority party, their right to amend and debate is in order. We both agree that the intention of this resolution is not to alter that practice and this resolution does not serve to set into motion any action that would alter that practice in any way. The two leaders agree to work together to ensure that conferees are appointed in a fair and bipartisan manner.

Mr. LOTT. The Senator is correct; we have reached understandings on the following related issues. First, I have discussed with the majority leader concerns that have been raised about the floor procedure known as ``filling the amendment tree.'' Senator Daschle and I appreciate and understand those concerns, and we wish to assure Senators that it is our intention that the Senate have full and vigorous debates in this 107th Congress, and that the right of all Senators to have their amendments considered will be honored. We have therefore jointly agreed that neither leader, nor their designees in the absence of the leader, will offer consecutive amendments to fill the amendment tree so as to deprive either side of the right to offer an amendment. We both agree that nothing in this resolution or colloquy limits the majority leader's right to amend a nonrelevant amendment nor does it limit the sponsor of that nonrelevant amendment from responding with a further amendment after the majority leader's amendment or amendments are disposed of. Second, we have agreed that the two parties will have equal access to common space in the Capitol complex for purposes of holding meetings, press conferences, and other events. Finally, we have agreed that henceforth the duties of presiding officer of the Senate, now under the control of the majority party, will be shared in part by the minority party.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, and I will not object.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could be recognized at this point, I do want to say I was certainly willing to cooperate with that. I have asked if there is a Member who feels the necessity of a recorded vote. I have not been so notified. I want to make sure Members understand we anticipate there will be a voice vote. However, there will be opportunity for debate and a colloquy which Senator Daschle and I will have between now and 3:30. So Members can have some idea of what to expect, we do expect to have the vote around 3:30. In the debate or comments that will need to be put in the Record, they can still be made after that. But between now and that time, we still have an opportunity for Members to present their statements on the Record.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I wouldn't say this is my preferred result, but I think it is a reasonable one with a serious dose of reality. We have work to do and we need to begin it now, not in a week or two or three or four. We need to conclude the assignment of our Members to the all important committees that will be having hearings on the nominees. We need to go forward with the confirmation hearings on the President's nominations to the Cabinet, not in 2 weeks or 3 weeks but right away, as soon as possible, as soon as the necessary paperwork has been completed and the schedule has been agreed to by the senior members of the committees. As soon as the Inauguration, we need to have in place a Secretary of the Treasury, a Secretary of State, a Secretary of Defense, perhaps a Secretary of Commerce--as many as we can get--so that this new administration will be ready to begin work the morning of Monday, January 22. More important than these rules agreements or the organization resolution and the hearings of the nominees is, what are we going to do with it? What are we going to do about the concerns of the American people? Will we be able to come together and do what needs to be done to improve the quality, availability, accountability, and safety of our schools in America? I think we can. But if we in this Chamber wrestle over finite details of the rules-- while they do make a difference, rules do affect substance--I think the American people will say: What is this talk of bipartisanship? Why aren't you coming together, agreeing on this, and moving to the agenda of education and dealing with the problems of our defense needs in America, dealing with the problem of readiness of the defense of our country, confronting the needs of our people on Medicare and what we are going to do about prescription drugs and Social Security reform? That was a big item in this campaign. To the credit of our President- elect, George W. Bush, he had the courage to step up and say we need to take a look at this. The last discussion I had with the Senator from New York, Mr. Pat Moynihan, in this aisle was what we should do about reforming Social Security, how it could be done, and just with two or three actions, we could secure Social Security for 70 years. By the way, he also talked about how he believes there should be some opportunity for individuals to invest some of that money. Social Security, Medicare, prescription drugs, defense, education, tax relief for working Americans that keeps the economy growing--that is the agenda. We are going to have tough debates. We will have different approaches, but we will find a way to come together and get a result because the American people are expecting that of us--the Republicans, the Democrats, President George W. Bush, all of us. I would prefer to have a clear advantage on every committee and a clear advantage number-wise on everything. While that is preferable, it is not the reality. There are those in this Chamber who will not agree with me that we are going to support this resolution. There are those in this Chamber who probably will not agree with Senator Daschle that this is enough. Some will say it is too much; others will say it is not enough. Who is to say? The day may come when we will say: Well, yes, we didn't do that right; we didn't figure some of the things that might happen or the way the rules might be used or abused. If that happens, then we will have to deal with it. Senator Daschle and I will have to go to the Member on his side of the aisle or my side of the aisle and say: That is not in good faith. That is not what we intended. Or, when we make a mistake, change it. We have done that. One of the last actions we did this past session was to put back in place a rule dealing with scope coming out of conference that we changed a few years earlier. We finally realized it was not right, and we changed it. What we have here, as difficult as it may make life for us, as difficult as it may be for our committee members and our chairmen and ranking members to make this situation work, it is going to require additional work, but it can be done. It is going to force us to work together more than we have in the past. No doubt. I do not think that is bad. I think this is a framework for bipartisanship. There has been a lot of talk about that word, and I am sure there are some people in this city, in this Chamber, who smirk at that, laugh at that. People across America are saying: I have heard enough of that; let's get some results here. It is a framework to see if we really mean it. It can force us to live up to the truest and best meaning of that word--nonpartisanship, Americanship, that is what we ought to call it--to find a way to get to these issues. The President has repeatedly talked about how he is going to be a uniter, not a divider; he is going to reach out. Be conservative, yes; he was elected because he is, but he also is compassionate about it. The Government can be involved and be helpful in certain areas. It can be a big problem in a lot of others. I guess I am of the school that follows the latter part of that more than the former, but there are clearly some roles for the Federal Government. I do not have to list them--defense, national transportation, health care concerns in America. This is America. We cannot leave any child behind. We cannot leave any mother or grandmother unattended. We have to be in a position to do something about those situations. We should follow the President-elect. Shouldn't we follow him? He has laid down a marker. He has talked about coming together and getting results. Should we do no less? This is a classic case of extending the hand of friendship, of good faith. Will it lead to tremendous accomplishments or will that hand of friendship be bitten or the posterior kicked by one side or the other? It could, but we have to start from a position of good faith and reach out and say we are going to make this work. If it does not work, then the American people will see. If these 50/ 50 committees do not function, then we can talk about obstructionism, and one way or the other, the American people will know who is trying to make it work and who is stalling it. If we come to this floor and have a debate on a tax bill and it passes this Senate by whatever number and does not get to conference or is tied up in conference or is killed in conference, do you think the American people are going to stand for that? I do not think so. We cannot let that happen. I have been here 28 years, in the House and Senate. I was here during the eighties. I watched Speaker Tip O'Neill. I had quite a relationship with him. On the floor, we fought like tigers. I even had his words taken down one time. He never uttered a word to me about that. He never held it against me. Privately, he could not have been any friendlier. In instance after instance, even though he controlled the Rules Committee, he had the power to stop the Reagan agenda. He did not do it. He would not do it. He said: No, this is the President. He was elected. He has a right to have his program considered and voted on. And the Speaker fought him like a tiger. I remember going to former Congressman--the Senator from Texas was there--Ralph Hall from Texas. I stood on the Democratic side of the aisle, and the Speaker came up and said: Ralph, you can't vote for this Reagan budget. I said to my friend, Ralph--actually, it was Sam Hall, not Ralph. Ralph Hall is a good man also.

Mr. LOTT. Sam, this is a chance where you can make a difference for history. We can control spending some, we can give the people a little tax relief in a way that will help the economy grow. He stood there with the two of us looking at him, took out his voting card, stuck it in the box, and voted for it. That required an act of courage. Did the Speaker get mad at him? Did the Speaker rough him up or punish him? No. He said: I am going to fight you, President Reagan, but as two good Irishmen, we will get together at the end of the day, we will have a good discussion, we will have a little fun, and we will talk about America. That is what is going to happen here. There will not be obstructionism. If there is, it will be clear who is doing it, if it is on our side, one way or the other, or on the other side. This is not a prescription for inaction. It could be a prescription for action beyond our wildest imaginations. We are going to talk a little bit more about what is in it. I will not go into all the details here. The resolution will be read. It is relatively short, relatively simple. In instance after instance, Senator Daschle and I discussed points, argued about points. When we could not come to agreement, we said we would deal with the rules as they are. So we got it down to what really matters. Yes, we are going to have 50/50 on the committees, but remember the Senate is 51/50, it is not 50/50. It is 51/50. The Constitution very clearly provides for this. Our forefathers were brilliant. They were brilliant. They could not have seen this exact situation, and while it is not unprecedented, it is rare that we have had these ties of 50/50, or in one instance I think it was 48/48, maybe one time 38/38. It has been relatively rare in 200 years, but they provided for this. It is in the Constitution. Senator Byrd carries his around. Mine is not quite as tattered as his, but I have referred to it quite a few times in my life. Article I, section 3: The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided. That is the solution. If it is 50/50, the Vice President breaks the tie. It is equally divided. We will have a way to deal with it. My concern about doing 50/50 was: It just cannot work, Senator Daschle. If we are killing a nominee or a bill in the subcommittee or in the full committee, there has to be a way to have that matter considered by the full Senate. Do my colleagues think if we had a Supreme Court nominee killed on a tie vote in the Judiciary Committee that the American people would stand for that or that the full Senate would be satisfied with that? No. So we labored and we labored, and we tried a lot of different innovative ideas--some I suggested, some Senator Daschle suggested--and most or all of them were not liked by both caucuses. Neither side liked them. We finally came up with what I think is a further extrapolation of what the Constitution provides, and that is, if there is a tie by a unique procedure, a discharge petition, a superdischarge petition, if you want to call it that, a discharge action, the matter could be brought to the floor, debated, yes, but not blocked on a unanimous consent request, not filibustered, but to get it on the calendar, whether it is the Legislative or Executive Calendar. At that point, all the rules of the Senate apply. When we go forward from there, all rights and prerogatives are preserved. It could be filibustered. A lot of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, when I talked about what the rules already were, were shocked. Most people do not realize you can filibuster a Federal judge. Sure, you can filibuster. We had one last year the Democratic side filibustered, and then they said: Oops, we don't think that is a good idea; that is not something we want to start doing around here, and backed away from it. We did; they did. We are going to fix that. The rider is there. On bills, sure, you can filibuster the motion to proceed, you can object to this, that, or the other and filibuster the bill. Nothing has changed on that. It will still be protected. I think we should try to find a way to do less of that, less filling up of the tree, no filling up of the tree, if at all possible. I don't intend to make that a practice, and I want to make it clear, and I will clarify it even later. We should not have situations where we filibuster every bill and have to file cloture in every instance. We ought to have a full and fair debate on both sides and move on and have a vote. We can do that. Different times call for different actions. Last year is history. It was an election year. It was an unusual election year. It rendered an unusual result. What are we going to do with it? Are we going to make this Republic work and produce for the people or are we going to argue over part B of rule XII of the Senate? It is important; I do not diminish it at all, but I think the American people expect more of us than that. This resolution may haunt me, but it is fair, and it will allow us to go on with the people's business. I yield the floor. Mr. CRAIG addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I appreciate the courtesy of the distinguished majority leader for this opportunity to speak. I want to extend also the appreciation of the Senate and a grateful Nation to the Presiding Officer, the Vice President of the United States, for the service he has given to our country. (Applause, Senators rising.)

Mr. LOTT. It is obvious, Mr. President, you still maintain your sense of humor. I want to thank you for your leadership and also for the example you have set through a very difficult time. You took the appropriate step, and now we are prepared to move into a transition and to a new administration. Facing New Challenges Here in the Senate also we are having a historic experience. I would like to welcome all of the new Senators who are joining us today. I congratulate them. I look forward to working with the new Senators on both sides of the aisle. As Senator Daschle said, I also extend, again, our appreciation to the Senators who may be in the Chamber and who are retiring or leaving the Senate, who have served, most of them, for at least 6 years and some for much longer than that. They have done a lot to make this country a better place in which to live. I also extend our appreciation to the extended family of the Senate, our staff members new and old, and to the families who are in the gallery today. I realize we should not be referring to those in the gallery, but there are a lot of people who have made an awful lot of contributions and sacrifices to make this day possible for us in the Chamber. So we have a lot of people we need to thank, and also to realize that we are in a position where we can make this an even better country. To the new Members, I urge them to take a look around and think about the challenges and opportunities they will have here. It is a unique institution, created by the founders of this Republic. Quite often we are frustrated with the rules--frustrated even today that we are going through this unique situation--but they had a lot of foresight. They created this unique Senate that makes sure we take the time to think through an issue and to have full debate. And while sometimes we believe, on one side or the other, that we did not have an ample opportunity for debate, I am sure we are going to work together to find a way to give everybody that opportunity over the next 6 years. For those of us who have been here a few years, we also face new challenges. We have one today. I must say it is the first time I have ever been referred to as the minority leader. And while it beats certain alternatives, I liked the other title better. But we are showing here today--and hope we will show during the next 17 days and, more importantly, during the months beyond--that we will always find a way to work together. It is quite often not easy to find consensus, as is forced upon us quite often in the Senate, but we must strive for it. Quite often Senator Daschle and I do our very best to find a logical solution to a problem, and we have 98 other Senators who may not agree with us, but we will continue to work together to make this great Republic--the best, most outstanding the minds of men have ever created--work as it should. I look around the Chamber, on both sides of the aisle, and I see men and women with the potential to raise this country to an even higher level, to our highest and our best. I will work as the leader of my party, and in 17 days as the majority leader of the Senate, to find a way to make that possible. One bit of information from a housekeeping standpoint. We will have some housekeeping resolutions that we will do in a moment. One of them is to begin the introduction of bills on January 22. Senators should be prepared to have bills ready. Senator Daschle and I have already talked about the fact that we will do the usual five alternating from one side to the other. We will do that for the first 20 bills. There will be a lot of other announcements Senator Daschle and I will make. So thank you for this opportunity. I thank you on my side of the aisle for this leadership role. Together we will go forward. I yield the floor.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I am happy to yield to the Senator.

Mr. LOTT. I appreciate that.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I have just spoken to Senator Daschle. We have been communicating with our colleagues on the other side of the Capitol. I understand the Senate will shortly receive from the House the appropriations bill containing the final appropriations measures, and we hope to have some agreement on how to proceed shortly. We will notify Senators and hotline that information. Once Senator Daschle arrives on the floor, hopefully we can move forward with that. In the meantime, there are just a couple of bits of information for our colleagues about the remainder of this session and the dates for activities we will have next year. Of course, we hope to have the sine die adjournment resolution here shortly. Senator Daschle and I jointly will have resolutions thanking the officers of the Senate, the staff of the Senate who do just a magnificent job on our behalf and on behalf of the American people quite often during long and weird hours. They really do a magnificent job, and we thank all of them for what they do. Also, I see Senator Reid is here, the assistant Democratic leader. He has really made a difference since he has been in his leadership position. He is always calm and always diligent. He works on both sides of the aisle. I want to acknowledge that and thank him for all of his work. I will not overdo it now because I don't want to get him into trouble as we approach the last few minutes of the session. I want to inform the Members of some important dates and events of interest concerning the beginning of the 107th Congress. I see Senator Daschle is here. He can communicate with the staff. I will run over these dates quickly, and then we can visit. Of course, at 12 noon on Wednesday, January 3, the 107th Congress will convene with an immediate live quorum, to be followed by the swearing-in ceremonies for the newly elected Senators. I want to emphasize that. That is on January 3. It is at 12 noon. There will be a live quorum, and all Senators are required by law, if they want to be sworn in and receive pay, to be here for that occasion. On Saturday, January 6, the Senate will proceed as a body to the Hall of the House of Representatives for the official counting of the electoral college votes. The Senate has passed a resolution that would move that to January 5, which would be a Friday, instead of Saturday, January 6. The House has not yet passed that resolution. But they have indicated that they may pass a resolution changing the date to Friday, January 5, for the counting of the electoral college votes. We will let all of our colleagues know exactly about that. I believe we are required to proceed at 1 p.m. on either Friday, January 5, or, as it now stands, January 6. We will make that clear later on. Senators will be notified if there is a date change, if and when it is confirmed. Of course, Inauguration of the 43rd President of the United States will occur at 12 noon on Saturday, January 20. Furthermore, because a Senate committee is a continuing body, committees may begin working on committee nominations on January 5 or 6. Senator Daschle and I will be working on that. But there is the possibility, between January 3 and the Inauguration, that there could be some committee hearings on nominations. We will have to work through that. Of course, it will depend on the receipt of those nominations once the investigations have been completed. We will work through what committees and how that will be handled. Members who might be involved will be notified as early as possible, and hopefully that will be even before the end of the year. Votes on confirmations may take place even on Saturday, January 20. I believe that has been the case in the past--if not January 20, certainly beginning on Monday, January 22. We will want to move forward very quickly on actually confirming the nominations. Senators will be further notified on January 3. Regarding the Cabinet nominations schedule, when we receive those nominations, again we will work together on what that schedule may be. Again, I want to thank the Senate officers, Senators, and leadership on both sides of the aisle for what I believe has been a very productive session and for the dedication of Senators to the American people. I see Senator Daschle is here. We have some resolutions we can do if we have a break here in a moment. Then we will have some that we want to do at the very end of the session. At this point, I yield the floor if Senator Lautenberg wishes to make any comments.

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, if the distinguished Senator from New Jersey would yield, perhaps that is a good point. Yes, I would like to hear the story uninterrupted. If the Senator would allow us to do a little bit of leadership business--one of which, or both of which I know the Senator would be very interested in--I ask, with the agreement of the Senator from New Jersey, that his statement appear in the Record as if uninterrupted, and the exchange with Senator Daschle, our colloquy, appear after his remarks.

Mr. LOTT. That would be my request.

Mr. LOTT. I yield to Senator Daschle.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank the Democratic leader for his fine work on this issue. I know there is a lot of passion, a lot of support for Amtrak. But let me remind my colleagues, I am one of those supporters. I have been an active supporter of the national rail passenger system and was very much involved a couple of years ago when we passed the Amtrak legislation. I had some strong opposition on our side of the aisle. I think we need it. Now, I must confess one of the reasons I think we need it is I want us to have good service, not just in the northeast but I also would like to have access from my own State of Mississippi to be able to get to Atlanta and Washington and Boston, and we are the beneficiaries of Amtrak service. I think we have to do it. I have pledged if it can't run efficiently, if it cannot run without going into debt, at some point we may want to say we just can't do that and decide what is going to be the successor program. But I also think it is guaranteed and doomed to failure if we don't give it an opportunity to succeed. If you don't have modern equipment, if you don't have the new fast trains, if you don't have a rapid rail system, it will not work. So I support this legislation. I want to commit to our colleagues here that I will join with Senator Daschle in cosponsoring this legislation next year. We will work together to get the appropriate hearings in the Finance Committee and hopefully in the Commerce Committee, too--even though this bill is under the Finance subcommittee jurisdiction because of the tax aspects of it--but the Amtrak part of it, of course, would fall under Commerce. I am on both committees and Senator Daschle will probably be on the Finance Committee, too. We will work with the ranking member and the chairman to get hearings and move this legislation. I cannot guarantee we will have the votes or that it will not be filibustered or that we can break a filibuster, but I think it is the right thing to do. I might just add, the chairman of the Amtrak board, Governor Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin, has been very actively involved. He supports this legislation. He has called me personally about this legislation. He really cares about it. When we talk about bipartisanship, transportation is an issue on which we have been able to work together in a bipartisan way, whether it is roads, AIR-21, TEA-21, Amtrak, rapid rail system. We can do it again. Maybe we can improve on this bill. We talked about that in an exchange yesterday. Maybe there are some things we can do, some tweaks that would make it better and resolve some of the concerns. And we will try to do that. I am prepared to make that commitment. I believe we can do it early next year. I am not talking about having it languish; I am trying to get movement on it in the first 3 months, 6 months of the session, so those who have reservations can offer amendments and we will vote on them. Hopefully, we can get it done, and I commit to do that.

Mr. LOTT. There is no question about it. I thought perhaps the Senator would want to comment, too, on what has just transpired. But I do want to include in the Record the fact that Senator Stevens also has assured our colleagues, and has reminded me again, he also commits, as chairman of the Appropriations Committee, his continued support for Amtrak.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could ask my colleagues to defer just a moment, Senator Daschle and I would like to get one more unanimous consent agreement in. Then I would like to yield to the Senators who are on their feet.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. With that, I do understand the Senate will shortly receive from the House the appropriations bill containing the final appropriations measures. I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding receipt of the papers, the Senate proceed to vote immediately on adoption of the conference report and, following passage, there be 40 minutes of explanation to be equally divided between the two leaders, with 20 minutes additional under the control of Senator Byrd, 45 minutes under the control of Senator Graham of Florida, and 10 minutes of Senator Lott's time to be controlled by Senator Specter.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could confirm, the unanimous consent was agreed to?