Connie Mack

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand in adjournment until the hour of 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, July 30; further, that immediately following the prayer, the Journal of the proceedings be deemed approved to date, the morning hour be deemed to have expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate immediately resume the energy and water appropriations bill under a previous consent agreement.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that the Senate now stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, the Senate can be expected to be in session late into the evening each day this week in order to consider appropriations bills and conference reports as they become available.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I just have a few more comments to make with respect to the legislative appropriations bill. I am trying to anticipate where we might have possible contention in a conference committee meeting, and that would be on the issue of dynamic scoring, which Senator Murray referred to in her opening statement. I am one who strongly supports the language, frankly, that was included in the House bill, which would allow for both the joint committee and for the CBO, Congressional Budget Office, to use dynamic scoring upon request. But I realize the situation that we are in in the Senate. There would have been a Budget Act point of order that could be raised against the entire bill if, in fact, it had not been removed in committee. And if I remember correctly, Senator Hatfield offered an amendment to remove the House language, so that we could proceed without a point of order being raised. Again, this is an issue that we will have to deal with in conference. I just want to make everybody aware that it is one in which there are strong feelings on both sides of the Capitol, and both sides of the aisle, I suspect. Lastly, I, again, would just like to thank Senator Murray for her cooperation in the effort that we have put together to bring about this appropriations bill. I also want to express my appreciation to Jim English, Eric Llgenfritz, and Larry Harris and Keith Kennedy of our side of the aisle, for the work they have put into the writing of this legislation. I appreciate the efforts all of you have made.

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of amendments numbered 5119 and 5118, which will occur on Tuesday, that the bill be advanced to third reading, and Senator Byrd be recognized for up to 20 minutes for closing remarks, to be followed immediately by final passage of H.R. 3754, the legislative appropriations bill; provided further, that amendments numbered 5118 and 5119 not be subject to second-degree amendments.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period for the transaction of morning business.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. I yield to our most distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules and Administration for his comments on the issue.

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I would like to bring the attention of the Senate to committee report language concerning the Library of Congress and the appointment and responsibilities of a deputy librarian. I also note the presence of the chairman of the Joint Committee on the Library, Senator Hatfield, and the chairman of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration. I wonder if they would care to engage in a brief colloquy regarding this issue. But let me first read the report language in question. The committee has reviewed the findings and recommendations of the recent audits of the Library, and believes that the single most important action to be taken would be the appointment of a deputy librarian fully empowered to be the chief executive officer of the Library. The management tasks identified in the audit reports are daunting, and must be given full-time attention. The extraordinary demands already placed upon the Librarian in any number of external arenas and in developing a vision for the Library's transition into a digital future make it impossible for him to deal with the day-to-day administration of the Library's operations. Those responsibilities must be delegated to the Deputy Librarian and the committee looks forward to that being done as soon as the deputy position is filled. Mr. President, the committee's phrasing in its instruction to the Library to empower the Deputy Librarian as the chief executive officer was done so advisedly. The committee is aware that the specific recommendation in the GAO management audit suggested that the deputy act as the chief operating officer. And, indeed the library is in the process of selecting a deputy librarian to fill the position as a chief operating officer. However, the committee wishes to make it crystal clear that, in our considered judgment, and for the reasons outlined in the report which I have just read, the Deputy Librarian should be charged with the responsibilities of a chief executive officer. The title and terminology are not as important as the idea that this committee will be looking to the deputy as the accountable authority in the day-to-day management of the institution. I yield to our most distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee who also serves as the chairman of the Joint Committee on the Library.

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

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

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

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator for working out the situation here a few moments ago. I am glad we were able to have the amendment offered, and I appreciate the Senator's understanding with respect to voting this on a voice vote. I am prepared to accept the amendment and take it to conference.

Mr. MACK. I am under the impression, since the Senator has offered the amendment, that his rights have been protected. We will be moving forward the remainder of this evening and then tomorrow taking whatever amendments have been agreed to in the unanimous consent request last week dealing with those amendments. I have forgotten the time that we were slotted for votes. It has not been set yet, but, again, the Senator's rights have been protected since he has offered the amendment.

Mr. MACK. I say to the Senator, we will be in a position to do that.

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

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, the first of the amendments is offered on behalf of Senator Hatfield. It amends language reported by the committee to provide for a 2-year reauthorization for the American Folklife Center in the Library of Congress. The second amendment extends certain provisions of Federal law to employees of the Senate for the Employees Child Care Center. The third amendment provides for the deposit of a contract termination payment to credit the expenses of the Sergeant at Arms. The fourth amendment authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Senate to oversee the development and implementation of a legislative information system for the Senate. Funds for that initiative may be derived from funds previously appropriated for a new financial management system for the Senate with the approval of the Committee on Appropriations. The fifth amendment brought to us today by the Disbursing Office authorizes the Financial Clerk of the Senate to receive payments for unaccrued annual leave for individuals whose pay is disbursed by the Senate and deposit those payments in the General Fund of the Treasury as a miscellaneous receipt. And, finally, the sixth amendment recommended to us by the Committee on Rules and Administration addresses the creation of a legislative branch-wide legislative information system. Mr. President, all of these amendments have been discussed with Senator Murray. I believe she has no objection. Therefore, I would ask that these six amendments be agreed to en bloc.

Mr. MACK. I am proposing an amendment on an important matter to the Senate. I am speaking of the quality and the cost of its legislative information systems. Two years ago, this committee requested from the Library of Congress an analysis of the duplication among the legislative systems supported by the Congress. That study documented that there is extensive overlap in these systems and that there are opportunities for reducing that duplication. We then directed the Library to prepare a plan for creating a single integrated information system that would serve the entire Congress. The committee received that report in February of this year. The plan gives us a useful framework for building a new, coordinated legislative information system that will better assist the Members of Congress to carry out their legislative duties. The plan recognizes that there are various independent responsibilities for legislative information within the Congress and proposes a technical scheme that takes advantage of this fact. The new system will therefore require the active support of all of the offices and agencies within the legislative branch that assist the Senate and the House in this critical area. In our commitment to the American people to reduce the size of the Government, this committee has been reluctant to recommend significant additional resources for any of the Congress' offices and agencies. We are not providing any additional funds for this legislative system, although we will allow the Secretary of the Senate, at his request, to reprogram some funds to support the Senate's need to modernize the collection and preparation of its legislative information. We do expect all legislative branch offices and agencies to support fully this very important initiative with their existing appropriated funds, which we believe are sufficient. This is a challenging task, and will require appropriate policies, guidelines, and oversight. We hope that the House of Representatives will join us in this task. If they do not, however, we shall proceed in the Senate nonetheless. Even without the participation of the House, the Senate can and must improve its own system and begin to reduce the duplication that currently exists. This amendment was prepared in consultation with the Committee on Rules and Administration. With this amendment, we are taking the next steps in creating a new legislative information system for the Senate by designating some of those responsibilities for this system now, specifically for the Secretary of the Senate, the Congressional Research Service, and the Library of Congress. The Committee on Rules and Administration has jurisdiction for this system and will be making other designations of responsibility as the system progresses. I am pleased that the distinguished chairman of our Committee on Rules and Administration shares our views on the importance of these matters, and that his committee is prepared to oversee the development of the Senate's new legislative system. amendment no. 5116 On page 8, after line 17 insert:

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I am pleased to present the fiscal year 1997 legislative branch appropriations bill to the Senate. The subcommittee builds upon the success that the Congress achieved last year in reducing the size and the cost of the legislative branch, and again demonstrates this Congress' leadership in making strides toward the imperative of a balanced budget. The subcommittee's recommendation is an appropriation of $2,165,081,000. This is a reduction of $22.275 million, or approximately 1 percent below the program levels in fiscal year 1996. The bill is $174 million below the requested amount, and compared to fiscal 1995, the bill reflects a $225 million reduction. While the legislative branch bill is the smallest in terms of dollars appropriated, with the adoption of this bill, we will have contributed nearly one-half billion dollars toward deficit reduction in just 2 fiscal years. The recommended funding for the Senate is $441.208 million, approximately $14 million above the 1996 enacted amount. However, the amount is $48 million below the request. In large part, the increases reflected in the bill are for cost of living adjustments for Senate employees and expenses for the Sergeant at Arms. I point out that Senate employees did not receive the 1996 COLA that was granted to other Federal employees. Specifically, the Senate's amendment to the bill provides $208 million for Senators' official personnel and office expense account. This amount is a 2 percent increase from last year's level. The increase is sufficient to accommodate an expected cost-of-living adjustment for Senate employees in the 1997 calendar year. The recommended funding for committees is $69.5 million, a $3 million increase, again, for cost-of-living adjustments. For the official mail cost, the funding is reduced by 9 percent. The recommended funding of $10 million is sufficient, however, to cover projected costs for fiscal year 1997. Again, Mr. President, I just say that while this is a reduction from $11 million last year to $10 million last year, in analyzing the trends and expenditures for mail, we believe we can make this reduction without requiring the Senators to make any reduction in their mailing. As you know, last year, we eliminated mass mailing. So we are talking about mail now that is primarily for the purpose of responding to inquiries from our constituents. Funding for salaries and expenses of the Secretary of the Senate is $14.225 million. That is an increase of $831,000. Funding for salaries and expenses of Sergeant at Arms is $99.968 million. That is an increase of $8.880 million. I bring my colleagues' attention to the fact that combined funding recommendations for the Secretary and the Sergeant at Arms fiscal year 1997 are still $8 million below the 1995 enacted levels. The subcommittee appreciates the leadership demonstrated by the Secretary of the Senate and the Sergeant at Arms. Each office is managing a substantial reduction this is fiscal year along with the compounded challenges rendered by the Congressional Accountability Act. I remind Members that, last year, we made reductions in the accounts of the Sergeant at Arms and Secretary of the Senate of between 12.5 and 14 percent. While they have been managing these reduced amounts, they have also been given an additional responsibility as a result of the Congressional Accountability Act. During the subcommittee hearings, the Secretary and Sergeant at Arms outlined a series of initiatives regarding technology. The subcommittee is pleased that under the direction of the Senate Rules Committee, the Senate is taking a long-term strategic planning approach in this area. The subcommittee looks forward to working with the Rules Committee on this issue of common concern. In addition, the subcommittee wishes to thank each of the legislative branch agencies for their cooperation and contributions in the development of this year's bill. On a special note, the subcommittee commends the General Accounting Office for its successful management of a 2-year, 25-percent reduction in its budget. Managing a funding reduction of such magnitude in a relatively short period has been very difficult, and the subcommittee wishes to commend the Comptroller General and the entire staff at GAO for an outstanding job. We had quite a discussion at our hearing with the Comptroller General as to the approach that was taken to downsize this Government agency 25 percent in a 2-year period. That is a substantial reduction. I would recommend to my colleagues that we ought to look at how the GAO went about this process of managing over a 2-year period a reduction of 25 percent in its budget, because they did it extremely well. They did it with a great deal of thought. They found ways to use technologies of today to make their operations more effective and efficient. Again, I think it is a case study in the way to manage the downsizing of a Government agency. I encourage everybody to look at what they have done and what they have accomplished. I will now yield to Senator Murray for any comments she wishes to make. I thank her and each member of the subcommittee for their hard work and cooperation in crafting this bill. Again, I want to say to Senator Murray that I appreciate very much the way we have, during the past 2 years, been able to work together in, I think, crafting two appropriations bills that the Senate can be proud of, and should again be used as an example. Frankly, it was in my mind that we should set an example for the rest of Government. If we are going to ask people to spend less and do with less, I think, again, our taking the lead in doing that is setting a good example. I now yield to Senator Murray for her comments.

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate now turn to the consideration of the legislative appropriations bill.

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I send a series of amendments to the desk and ask for their consideration en bloc.

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendments be dispensed with.

Mr. MACK. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 5118 (Purpose: To clarify the uses of Member weblinks)

Mr. MACK. I believe I would be in a position to object to that. As I understand it, the unanimous-consent request indicates that there is a slot for Senator McCain to offer an amendment. I have the right to object to a request for someone to offer an amendment on someone else's behalf.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce with my colleagues Senators Lieberman, Abraham, Lott, and Hatch the District of Columbia Economic Recovery Act. The social, administrative, and fiscal problems of our Nation's Capital are well documented: High crime rates, poor schools, deteriorating infrastructure, and inadequate delivery of basic public services, just to name a few. The District of Columbia is facing its greatest economic crisis since it was established in 1790. Congress has taken major steps, including the creation of a financial control board, to assist the city during this current financial crisis. But despite these efforts, the city has a long way to go to achieve economic self-sufficiency. The root of the District's problems is an ever-eroding middle class. Since 1950, Washington's population has declined by nearly 250,000 residents: In fact, 68,000 people left between 1988 and 1993 alone. The vast majority were middle-class families whose taxes funded the city's operations. So far, D.C.'s response to this decline has been misguided: even-higher taxes. But this has only led to even more residents leaving the city in search of lower tax rates, better schools, and safer streets. We believe that the best way to help the District is to promote economic growth, and the best way to promote economic growth is to significantly reduce the tax burden on its residents. Economic growth will mean more jobs, more opportunity, greater private sector investment, and ultimately a better quality of life in the Nation's Capital. There is a large and growing consensus that our current income tax system has become a tremendous obstacle to economic growth and an improved standard of living. After eight decades of misuse by lawmakers, lobbyists, and special interests, today's tax system is unfair, complex, costly, and punishes work, savings, and investment. Therefore, we as a nation need to fundamentally rethink the manner in which income is taxed in order to construct a system that is equitable, efficient, and can support economic growth. This effort, which perhaps appropriately begins in the Nation's Capital, is an important first step. In order to achieve genuine tax reform, we must take the blinkers off, special interests must give way to the overriding national concerns, partisan class warfare must end, and the defenders of the status quo must step aside to make way for positive change. Mere tinkering with the Tax Code, or simply reshuffling the existing tax burden is not genuine tax reform. We must create a new tax structure that allows everyone to benefit from economic growth. The flat tax encompasses this new thinking and fundamental change needed to create a fair, simple, and pro-growth tax system. The D.C. Economic Recovery Act is an important step in luring middle- class taxpayers back to the District of Columbia. It provides tax incentives, including a 15-percent flat income tax rate for all District residents and deductions of $15,000 for individual filers; $25,000 for head of household filers; and $30,000 for married filers. This will benefit everyone, especially the poor and middle class. Our bill includes a $5,000 first-time home buyers provision designed to assist middle-class families in purchasing homes within the District of Columbia. Second, we have established a zero capital gains tax rate on investments within the District, to help spur investment in the District, so middle-class residents won't be hurt by onerous capital gains taxes when they decide to sell their homes. In addition to these incentives, we have included a brown-fields provision that is sure to improve the city's quality of life by encouraging companies to clean up environmentally damaged District land. This bill also provides the opportunity for all Americans to participate in the economic revitalization of the District of Columbia by extending to everyone a zero capital gains rate for all investments made within the District. We believe the American people want to take pride in this city, and want it to represent all the best this Nation has to offer. For too long, the city's economy has been locked into the growth and declines of the Federal Government. Our bill offers the chance to spur nongovernmental economic investment in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia is not only home to the people who live here, it is truly the Nation's city. Historically, Congress has recognized this fact, and assured the financial integrity of the District. However, we now realize that simply throwing money at the problem is not the answer. We must find a way to fundamentally improve the city without demanding additional financial commitments from American taxpayers. We believe that these incentives, along with responsible and sensible financial management, are just what the District needs to become self- sufficient.

Mr. MACK

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce with my colleagues Senators Lieberman, Abraham, Lott, and Hatch the District of Columbia Economic Recovery Act. The social, administrative, and fiscal problems of our Nation's Capital are well documented: High crime rates, poor schools, deteriorating infrastructure, and inadequate delivery of basic public services, just to name a few. The District of Columbia is facing its greatest economic crisis since it was established in 1790. Congress has taken major steps, including the creation of a financial control board, to assist the city during this current financial crisis. But despite these efforts, the city has a long way to go to achieve economic self-sufficiency. The root of the District's problems is an ever-eroding middle class. Since 1950, Washington's population has declined by nearly 250,000 residents: In fact, 68,000 people left between 1988 and 1993 alone. The vast majority were middle-class families whose taxes funded the city's operations. So far, D.C.'s response to this decline has been misguided: even-higher taxes. But this has only led to even more residents leaving the city in search of lower tax rates, better schools, and safer streets. We believe that the best way to help the District is to promote economic growth, and the best way to promote economic growth is to significantly reduce the tax burden on its residents. Economic growth will mean more jobs, more opportunity, greater private sector investment, and ultimately a better quality of life in the Nation's Capital. There is a large and growing consensus that our current income tax system has become a tremendous obstacle to economic growth and an improved standard of living. After eight decades of misuse by lawmakers, lobbyists, and special interests, today's tax system is unfair, complex, costly, and punishes work, savings, and investment. Therefore, we as a nation need to fundamentally rethink the manner in which income is taxed in order to construct a system that is equitable, efficient, and can support economic growth. This effort, which perhaps appropriately begins in the Nation's Capital, is an important first step. In order to achieve genuine tax reform, we must take the blinkers off, special interests must give way to the overriding national concerns, partisan class warfare must end, and the defenders of the status quo must step aside to make way for positive change. Mere tinkering with the Tax Code, or simply reshuffling the existing tax burden is not genuine tax reform. We must create a new tax structure that allows everyone to benefit from economic growth. The flat tax encompasses this new thinking and fundamental change needed to create a fair, simple, and pro-growth tax system. The D.C. Economic Recovery Act is an important step in luring middle- class taxpayers back to the District of Columbia. It provides tax incentives, including a 15-percent flat income tax rate for all District residents and deductions of $15,000 for individual filers; $25,000 for head of household filers; and $30,000 for married filers. This will benefit everyone, especially the poor and middle class. Our bill includes a $5,000 first-time home buyers provision designed to assist middle-class families in purchasing homes within the District of Columbia. Second, we have established a zero capital gains tax rate on investments within the District, to help spur investment in the District, so middle-class residents won't be hurt by onerous capital gains taxes when they decide to sell their homes. In addition to these incentives, we have included a brown-fields provision that is sure to improve the city's quality of life by encouraging companies to clean up environmentally damaged District land. This bill also provides the opportunity for all Americans to participate in the economic revitalization of the District of Columbia by extending to everyone a zero capital gains rate for all investments made within the District. We believe the American people want to take pride in this city, and want it to represent all the best this Nation has to offer. For too long, the city's economy has been locked into the growth and declines of the Federal Government. Our bill offers the chance to spur nongovernmental economic investment in the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia is not only home to the people who live here, it is truly the Nation's city. Historically, Congress has recognized this fact, and assured the financial integrity of the District. However, we now realize that simply throwing money at the problem is not the answer. We must find a way to fundamentally improve the city without demanding additional financial commitments from American taxpayers. We believe that these incentives, along with responsible and sensible financial management, are just what the District needs to become self- sufficient.