Pat Roberts

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the distinguished Presiding Officer. (The remarks of Mr. Roberts pertaining to the introduction of S. 478 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today, even as I speak, the members of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee are in the process of marking up the BEST bill. The BEST bill is an acronym describing an effort to try to put together the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I think without question, in poll after poll taken in America, trying to determine what the American citizenry is concerned about, every one of the polls show the No. 1 issue of concern on the minds of American citizens today is education. Today I am very proud to announce I am joined by my colleagues, Senator Bingaman and Senator Kennedy, and there will be other cosponsors as well, but they are the original cosponsors in introducing legislation I think without question addresses a very critical need within the American educational system, and also in regard to our national security, as well; that is, the need to improve math and science education. As a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, I want to work with Members on both sides of the aisle. That is what we are attempting to do in the markup this morning: to address the immediate need to improve and enhance the K-through-12 math and science educational level in the United States. Simply put, the American educational system is not producing enough students with specialized skills in engineering, science, technology, and math to fill many of the jobs currently available that we need and that are vital to the United States. Other countries are simply outpacing us in the number of students in education in EMST, engineering, math, science, and technology study. As a result of this shortage of skilled workers, Congress had to increase the number of H- 1B visas by almost 300,000 from fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2002. Now, the United States will need to produce four times as many scientists and engineers than we currently produce in order to meet our future demand. The technology community alone will add 20 million jobs in the next decade that require technical expertise. The U.S. has been a leader in technology for decades and the new economy has created and will continue to create an ample number of jobs that require this kind of skilled workforce. While increasing the number of visas will assist our American economies with their current labor shortage in specialty and technical areas, we need to focus on long-term solutions through the education of our children. Improving our students' knowledge of math and science and technology is not only a concern of American companies to remain competitive but should also be a concern of our U.S. national security. The distinguished acting Presiding Officer, the Senator from Oklahoma, has the privilege, along with me, to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee. He is the chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee. I am in charge of a subcommittee called Emerging Threats and Capabilities. Guess what is now a real threat, not an emerging threat. According to the latest reports on national security, the lack of engineering, science, technology, and math education, beginning at the K-through-12 level, imposes a great security threat. We don't have the people to do the job to protect our country in regard to cyber threats and the many other threats that certainly threaten our national security. The report issued by the U.S. Commission on National Security for the 21st century reports: The base of American national security is the strength of the American economy. And our education system. Therefore, the health of the U.S. economy depends not only on citizens that can produce and direct innovation, but also on a populace that can effectively assimilate the new tools and the technologies. This is critical not just for the U.S. economy in general but specifically for the defense industry, which simultaneously develops and defends against the same technologies. This is not only true in regard to that commission report, what we call the Hart-Rudman report, but it is true in regard to the reports by the Bremer commission, by the Gilmore commission, and the CSIS study. Commission report after commission report says we are lacking in regard to this kind of expertise and this kind of skill. The EMST bill builds on several goals outlined in the National Commission on Mathematics and Science and Teaching of the 21st century. That is the rather famous and well-read report now called the Glenn report. These goals include: First, establishing an ongoing system to improve science and math education in K-12. The legislation we have introduced would accomplish this through afterschool and day-care opportunities for more hands-on learning and programming that is focused on math and science. It also strives to make all middle school graduates technology literate through a technology training program. Second, it does increase the number of math and science teachers and improve their preparation. EMST accomplishes this by several means, including intensive summer development institutes, grants for teacher technology training software and instructional materials, master teacher programs that aid other teachers and bring expertise in math, science, or technology. And finally, expansion of the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse to allow access via the Internet to real programs that effectively teach science and math. Third, the bill makes teaching science and math more attractive for teachers. The EMST bill provides mentoring for teachers to encourage them to stay in their profession, in addition to educating our high school students about the course of study to enter the science, math, and the teaching field. Mr. President, I encourage all my colleagues to support increasing our K-through-12 teachers' ability to teach math, science, and technology to our students and encourage these students to enter into EMST fields by supporting this legislation. I don't think it is an exaggeration to say our future depends on it.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, today, even as I speak, the members of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee are in the process of marking up the BEST bill. The BEST bill is an acronym describing an effort to try to put together the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I think without question, in poll after poll taken in America, trying to determine what the American citizenry is concerned about, every one of the polls show the No. 1 issue of concern on the minds of American citizens today is education. Today I am very proud to announce I am joined by my colleagues, Senator Bingaman and Senator Kennedy, and there will be other cosponsors as well, but they are the original cosponsors in introducing legislation I think without question addresses a very critical need within the American educational system, and also in regard to our national security, as well; that is, the need to improve math and science education. As a member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, I want to work with Members on both sides of the aisle. That is what we are attempting to do in the markup this morning: to address the immediate need to improve and enhance the K-through-12 math and science educational level in the United States. Simply put, the American educational system is not producing enough students with specialized skills in engineering, science, technology, and math to fill many of the jobs currently available that we need and that are vital to the United States. Other countries are simply outpacing us in the number of students in education in EMST, engineering, math, science, and technology study. As a result of this shortage of skilled workers, Congress had to increase the number of H- 1B visas by almost 300,000 from fiscal year 2000 to fiscal year 2002. Now, the United States will need to produce four times as many scientists and engineers than we currently produce in order to meet our future demand. The technology community alone will add 20 million jobs in the next decade that require technical expertise. The U.S. has been a leader in technology for decades and the new economy has created and will continue to create an ample number of jobs that require this kind of skilled workforce. While increasing the number of visas will assist our American economies with their current labor shortage in specialty and technical areas, we need to focus on long-term solutions through the education of our children. Improving our students' knowledge of math and science and technology is not only a concern of American companies to remain competitive but should also be a concern of our U.S. national security. The distinguished acting Presiding Officer, the Senator from Oklahoma, has the privilege, along with me, to serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee. He is the chairman of the Readiness Subcommittee. I am in charge of a subcommittee called Emerging Threats and Capabilities. Guess what is now a real threat, not an emerging threat. According to the latest reports on national security, the lack of engineering, science, technology, and math education, beginning at the K-through-12 level, imposes a great security threat. We don't have the people to do the job to protect our country in regard to cyber threats and the many other threats that certainly threaten our national security. The report issued by the U.S. Commission on National Security for the 21st century reports: The base of American national security is the strength of the American economy. And our education system. Therefore, the health of the U.S. economy depends not only on citizens that can produce and direct innovation, but also on a populace that can effectively assimilate the new tools and the technologies. This is critical not just for the U.S. economy in general but specifically for the defense industry, which simultaneously develops and defends against the same technologies. This is not only true in regard to that commission report, what we call the Hart-Rudman report, but it is true in regard to the reports by the Bremer commission, by the Gilmore commission, and the CSIS study. Commission report after commission report says we are lacking in regard to this kind of expertise and this kind of skill. The EMST bill builds on several goals outlined in the National Commission on Mathematics and Science and Teaching of the 21st century. That is the rather famous and well-read report now called the Glenn report. These goals include: First, establishing an ongoing system to improve science and math education in K-12. The legislation we have introduced would accomplish this through afterschool and day-care opportunities for more hands-on learning and programming that is focused on math and science. It also strives to make all middle school graduates technology literate through a technology training program. Second, it does increase the number of math and science teachers and improve their preparation. EMST accomplishes this by several means, including intensive summer development institutes, grants for teacher technology training software and instructional materials, master teacher programs that aid other teachers and bring expertise in math, science, or technology. And finally, expansion of the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse to allow access via the Internet to real programs that effectively teach science and math. Third, the bill makes teaching science and math more attractive for teachers. The EMST bill provides mentoring for teachers to encourage them to stay in their profession, in addition to educating our high school students about the course of study to enter the science, math, and the teaching field. Mr. President, I encourage all my colleagues to support increasing our K-through-12 teachers' ability to teach math, science, and technology to our students and encourage these students to enter into EMST fields by supporting this legislation. I don't think it is an exaggeration to say our future depends on it.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, in accordance with rule XXVI(2) of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I ask that the Rules of Procedure of the Select Committee on Ethics, which were adopted February 23, 1978, and revised November 1999, be printed in the Congressional Record for the 107th Congress. Select Committee on Ethics Jurisdiction and Authority, S. Res. 338, 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964) Resolved, That (a) is hereby established a permanent select committee of the Senate to be known as the Select Committee on Ethics (referred to hereinafter as the ``Select Committee'') consisting of six Members of the Senate, of whom three shall be selected from Members of the majority party and three shall be selected from Members of the minority party. Members thereof shall be appointed by the Senate in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 1 of Rule XXIV of the standing rules for the Senate at the beginning of each Congress. For purposes of paragraph 4 of Rule XXV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, service of a Senator as a Member or chairman of the Select Committee shall not be taken into account. (b) Vacancies in the Membership of the Select Committee shall not affect the authority of the remaining Members to execute the functions of the committee, and shall be filled in the same manner as original appointments thereto are made. (c)(1) A majority of the members of the Select Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business involving complaints or allegations of, or information about, misconduct, including resulting preliminary inquiries, adjudicatory reviews, recommendations or reports, and matters relating to Senate Resolution 400, agreed to May 19, 1976. (2) Three Members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of routine business of the Select Committee not covered by the first paragraph of this subparagraph, including requests for opinions and interpretations concerning the Code of Official Conduct or any other statute or regulation under the jurisdiction of the Select Committee, if one Member of the quorum is a Member of the Majority Party and one Member of the quorum is a Member of the minority Party. During the transaction of routine business any Member of the Select Committee constituting the quorum shall have the right to postpone further discussion of a pending matter until such time as a majority of the Members of the Select Committee are present. (3) The Select Committee may fix a lesser number as a quorum for the purpose of taking sworn testimony. (d)(1) A member of the Select Committee shall be ineligible to participate in-- (A) any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review relating to-- (i) the conduct of-- (I) such member; (II) any officer or employee the member supervises; or (III) any employee of any officer the member supervises; or (ii) any complaint filed by the member, and (B) the determinations and recommendations of the Select Committee with respect to any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review described in subparagraph (A). For purposes of this paragraph, a member of the Select Committee and an officer of the Senate shall be deemed to supervise any officer or employee consistent with the provisions of paragraph 12 of rule XXXVII of the Standing Rules of the Senate. (2) A member of the Select Committee may, at the discretion of the member, disqualify himself or herself from participating in any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review pending before the Select Committee and the determinations and recommendations of the Select Committee with respect to any such preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review. Notice of such disqualification shall be given in writing to the President of the Senate. (3) Whenever any member of the Select Committee is ineligible under paragraph (1) to participate in any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review or disqualified himself or herself under paragraph (2) from participating in any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review, another Senator shall, subject to the provisions of subsection (d), be appointed to serve as a member of the Select Committee solely for purposes of such preliminary inqiury or adjudicatory review and the determinations and recommendations of the Select Committee with respect to such preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review. Any Member of the Senate appointed for such purposes shall be of the same party as the Member who is inelgible or disqualified himself or herself. Sec. 2. (a) It shall be the duty of the Select Committee to-- (1) receive complaints and investigate allegations of improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate, violations of law, violations of the Senate Code of Official Conduct and violations of rules and regulations of the Senate, relating to the conduct of individuals in the performance of their duties as Members of the Senate, or as officers or employees of the Senate, and to make appropriate findings of fact and conclusions with respect thereto; (2)(A) recommend to the Senate by report or resolution by a majority vote of the full committee disciplinary action to be taken with respect to such violations which the Select Committee shall determine, after according to the individual concerned due notice and opportunity for a hearing, to have occurred; (B) pursuant to subparagraph (A) recommend discipline, including-- (i) in the case of a Member, a recommendation to the Senate for expulsion, censure, payment of restitution, recommendation to a Member's party conference regarding the Member's seniority or positions of responsibility, or a combination of these; and (ii) in the case of an officer or employee, dismissal, suspension, payment of restitution, or a combination of these; and (3) subject to the provisions of subsection (e), by a unanimous vote of 6 members, order that a Member, officer or employee be reprimanded or pay restitution, or both, if the Select Committee determines, after according to the Member, officer, or employee due notice and opportunity for a hearing, that misconduct occurred warranting discipline less serious than discipline by the full Senate; (4) in the circumstances described in subsection (d)(3), issue a public or private letter of admonition to a member, officer, or employee, which shall not be subject to appeal to the Senate; (5) recommend to the Senate, by report or resolution, such additional rules or regulations as the Select Committee shall determine to be necessary or desirable to insure proper standards of conduct by Members of the Senate, and by officers or employees of the Senate, in the performance of their duties and the discharge of their responsibilities; (6) by a majority vote of the full committee, report violations of any law, including the provision of false information to the Select Committee, to the proper Federal and State authorities; and (7) develop and implement programs and materials designed to educate Members, officers, and employees about the laws, rules, regulations, and standards of conduct applicable to such individuals in the performance of their duties. (b) For the purposes of this resolution-- (1) the term ``sworn complaint'' means a written statement of facts, submitted under penalty of perjury, within the personal knowledge of the complainant alleging a violation of law the Senate Code of Official Conduct, or any other rule or regulation of the Senate relating to the conduct of individuals in the performance of their duties as Members, officer, or employees of the Senate; (2) the term ``preliminary inquiry'' means a proceeding undertaken by the Select Committee following the receipt of a complaint or allegation of, or information about, misconduct by a Member, officer, or employee of the Senate to determine whether there is substantial credible evidence which provides substantial cause for the Select Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee has occurred; and (3) the term ``adjudicatory review'' means a proceeding undertakin by the Select Committee after a finding, on the basis of a preliminary inquiry, that there is substantial credible evidence which provides substantial cause for the Select Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee has occurred-- (c)(1) No-- (A) adjudicatory review of conduct of a Member or officer of the Senate may be conducted; (B) report, resolution, or recommendation relating to such a adjudicatory review of conduct may be made; and (C) letter of admonition pursuant to subsection (d)(3) may be issued, unless approved by the affirmative recorded vote of not fewer than 4 members of the Select Committee. (2) No other resolution, report, recommendation, interpretative ruling, or advisory opinion may be made without an affirmative vote of a majority of the Members of the Select Committee voting. (d)(1) When the Select Committee receives a sworn complaint or other allegation or information about a Member, officer, or employee of the Senate, it shall promptly conduct a preliminary inquiry into matters raised by that complaint, allegation, or information. The preliminary inquiry shall be of a duration and scope necessary to determine whether there is substantial credible evidence which provides substantial cause for the Select Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Select Committee has occurred. The Select Committee may delegate to the chairman and vice chairman the discretion to determine the appropriate duration, scope, and conduct of a preliminary inquiry. (2) If, as a result of a preliminary inquiry under paragraph (1), the Select Committee determines by a recorded vote that there is not such substantial credible evidence, the Select Committee shall dismiss the matter. The Select Committee may delegate to the chairman and vice chairman the authority, on behalf of the Select Committee, to dismiss any matter that they determine, after a preliminary inquiry, lacks substantial merit. The Select Committee shall inform the individual who provided to the Select Committee the complaint, allegation, or information, and the individual who is the subject of the complaint, allegation, or information, of the dismissal, together with an explanation of the basis for the dismissal. (3) If, as a result of a preliminary inquiry under paragraph (1), the Select Committee determines that a violation is inadvertent, technical, or otherwise of a de minimis nature, the Select Committee may dispose of the matter by issuing a public or private letter of admonition, which shall not be considered discipline. The Select Committee may issue a public letter of admonition upon a similar determination at the conclusion of an adjudicatory review. (4) If, as a result of a preliminary inquiry under paragraph (1), the Select Committee determines that there is such substantial credible evidence and the matter cannot be appropriately disposed of under paragraph (3), the Select Committee shall promptly initiate an adjudicatory review. Upon the conclusion of such adjudicatory review, the Select Committee shall report to the Senate, as soon as practicable, the results of such adjudicatory review together with its recommendations (if any) pursuant to subsection (a)(2). (e)(1) Any individual who is the subject of a reprimand or order of restitution, or both, pursuant to subsection (a)(3) may, within 30 days of the Select Committee's report to the Senate on its action imposing a reprimand or order of restitution, or both, appeal to the Senate by providing written notice of the basis for the appeal to the Select Committee and the presiding officer of the Senate. The presiding officer of the Senate shall cause the notice of the appeal to be printed in the Congressional Record and the Senate Journal. (2) A motion to proceed to consideration of an appeal pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be highly privileged and not debatable. If the motion to proceed to consideration of the appeal is agreed to, the appeal shall be decided on the basis of the Select Committee's report to the Senate. Debate on the appeal shall be limited to 10 hours, which shall be divided equally between, and controlled by, those favoring and those opposing the appeal. (f) The Select Committee may, in its discretion, employ hearing examiners to hear testimony and make findings of fact and/or recommendations to the Select Committee concerning the disposition of complaints. (g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no adjudicatory review shall be initiated of any alleged violation of any law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, rule, or regulation which was not in effect at the time the alleged violation occurred. No provisions of the Senate Code of Official Conduct shall apply to or require disclosure of any act, relationship, or transaction which occurred prior to the effective date of the applicable provision of the Code. The Select Committee may initiate an adjudicatory review of any alleged violation of a rule or law which was in effect prior to the enactment of the Senate Code of Official Conduct if the alleged violation occurred while such rule or law was in effect and the violation was not a matter resolved on the merits by the predecessor Select Committee. (h) The Select Committee shall adopt written rule setting forth procedures to be used in conducting preliminary inquiries and adjudicatory reviews. (i) The Select Committee from time to time shall transmit to the Senate its recommendation as to any legislative measures which it may consider to be necessary for the effective discharge of its duties. Sec. 3. (a) The Select Committee is authorized to (1) make such expenditures; (2) hold such hearings; (3) sit and act at such times and places during the sessions, recesses, and adjournment periods of the Senate; (4) require by subpoena or otherwise the attendance of such witnesses and the production of such correspondence, books, papers, and documents; (5) administer such oaths; (6) take such testimony orally or by deposition; (7) employ and fix the compensation of a staff director, a counsel, an assistant counsel, one or more investigators, one or more hearing examiners, and such technical, clerical, and other assistants and consultants as it deems advisable; and (8) to procure the temporary services (not in excess of one year) or intermittent services of individual consultants, or organizations thereof, by contract as independent contractors or, in the case of individuals, by employment at daily rates of compensation not in excess of the per diem equivalent of the highest rate of compensation which may be paid to a regular employee of the Select Committee. (b)(1) The Select Committee is authorized to retain and compensate counsel not employed by the Senate (or by any department or agency of the executive branch of the Government) whenever the Select Committee determines that the retention of outside counsel is necessary or appropriate for any action regarding any complaint or allegation, which, in the determination of the Select Committee is more appropriately conducted by counsel not employed by the Government of the United States as a regular employee. (2) Any adjudicatory review as defined in section 2(b)(3) shall be conducted by outside counsel as authorized in paragraph (1), unless the Select Committee determines not to use outside counsel. (c) With the prior consent of the department or agency concerned, the Select Committee may (1) utilize the services, information and facilities of any such department or agency of the Government, and (2) employ on a reimbursable basis or otherwise the services of such personnel of any such department or agency as it deems advisable. With the consent of any other committee of the Senate, or any subcommittee thereof, the Select Committee may utilize the facilities and services of the staff of such other committee or subcommittee whenever the chairman of the Select Committee determines that such action is necessary and appropriate. (d)(1) Subpoenas may be authorized by-- (A) the Select Committee; or (B) the chairman and vice chairman, acting jointly. (2) Any such subpoena shall be issued and signed by the chairman and the vice chairman and may be served by any person designated by the chairman and vice chairman. (3) The chairman or any member of the Select Committee may administer oaths to witnesses. (e)(1) The Select Committee shall prescribe and publish such regulations as it feels are necessary to implement the Senate Code of Official Conduct. (2) The Select Committee is authorized to issue interpretative rulings explaining and clarifying the application of any law, the Code of Official Conduct, or any rules or regulation of the Senate within its jurisdiction. (3) The Select Committee shall render an advisory opinion, in writing within a reasonable time, in response to a written request by a Member or officer of the Senate or a candidate for nomination for election, or election to the Senate, concerning the application of any law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, or any rules or regulation of the Senate within its jurisdiction to a specific factual situation pertinent to the conduct or proposed conduct of the person seeking the advisory opinion. (4) The Select Committee may in its discretion render an advisory opinion in writing within a reasonable time in response to a written request by an employee of the Senate concerning the application of any law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, or any rule or regulation of the Senate within its jurisdiction to a specific factual situation pertinent to the conduct or proposed conduct of the person seeking the advisory opinion. (5) Notwithstanding any provision of the Senate Code of Official Conduct or any rule or regulation of the Senate, any person who relies upon any provision or finding of an advisory opinion in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs (3) and (4) and who acts in good faith in accordance with the provisions and findings of such advisory opinion shall not, as a result of any such act, be subject to any sanction by the Senate. (6) Any advisory opinion rendered by the Select Committee under paragraphs (3) and (4) may be relied upon by (A) any person involved in the specific transaction or activity with respect to which such advisory opinion is rendered: Provided, however, that the request for such advisory opinion included a complete and accurate statement of the specific factual situation; and, (B) any person involved in any specific transaction or activity which is indistinguishable in all its material aspects from the transaction or activity with respect to which such advisory opinion is rendered. (7) Any advisory opinion issued in response to a request under paragraph (3) or (4) shall be printed in the Congressional Record with appropriate deletions to assure the privacy of the individual concerned. The Select Committee shall, to the extent practicable, before rendering an advisory opinion, provide any interested party with an opportunity to transmit written comments to the Select Committee with respect to the request for such advisory opinion. The advisory opinions issued by the select Committee shall be compiled, indexed, reproduced, and made available on a periodic basis. (8) A brief description of a waiver granted under paragraph 2(c) [NOTE: Now Paragraph 1] of Rule XXXIV or paragraph 1 of Rule XXXV of the Standing Rules of the Senate shall be made available upon request in the select Committee office with appropriate deletions to assure the privacy of the individual concerned. Sec. 4. The expenses of the Select Committee under this resolution shall be paid from the contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers approved by the chairman of the Select Committee. Sec. 5. As used in this resolution, the term ``officer or employee of the Senate'' means-- (1) an elected officer of the Senate who is not a Member of the Senate; (2) an employee of the Senate, any committee or subcommittee of the Senate, or any Member of the Senate; (3) the legislative Counsel of the Senate or any employee of his office; (4) an Official Reporter of Debates of the Senate and any person employed by the Official Reporters of Debates of the Senate in connection with the performance of their official duties; (5) a Member of the Capitol Police force whose compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate; (6) an employee of the Vice President if such employee's compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate; and (7) an employee of a joint committee of the Congress whose compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate. Part II: Supplementary Procedural Rules Rule 1. General Procedures (a) Officers: In the absence of the Chairman, the duties of the Chair shall be filled by the Vice Chairman or, in the Vice Chairman's absence, a Committee member designated by the Chairman. (b) Procedural Rules: The basic procedural rules of the Committee are stated as a part of the Standing Orders of the Senate in Senate Resolution 338, 88th Congress, as amended, as well as other resolutions and laws. Supplementary Procedural Rules are stated herein and are hereinafter referred to as the Rules. The Rules shall be published in the Congressional Record not later than thirty days after adoption, and copies shall be made available by the Committee office upon request. (c) Meetings: (1) The regular meeting of the Committee shall be the first Thursday of each month while the Congress is in session. (2) Special meetings may be held at the call of the Chairman or Vice Chairman if at least forty-eight hours notice is furnished to all members. If all members agree, a special meeting may be held on less than forty-eight hours notice. (3)(A) If any member of the Committee desires that a special meeting of the Committee be called, the member may file in the office of the Committee a written request to the Chairman or Vice Chairman for that special meeting. (B) Immediately upon the filing of the request the Clerk of the Committee shall notify the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the filing of the request. If, within three calendar days after the filing of the request, the Chairman or the Vice Chairman does not call the requested special meeting, to be held within seven calendar days after the filing of the request, any three of the members of the Committee may file their written notice in the office of the Committee that a special meeting of the Committee will be held at a specified date and hour; such special meeting may not occur until forty-eight hours after the notice is filed. The Clerk shall immediately notify all members of the Committee of the date and hour of the special meeting. The Committee shall meet at the specified date and hour. (d) Quorum: (1) A majority of the members of the Select Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business involving complaints or allegations of, or information about, misconduct, including resulting preliminary inquiries, adjudicatory reviews, recommendations or reports, and matters relating to Senate Resolution 400, agreed to May 19, 1976. (2) Three members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of the routine business of the Select Committee not covered by the first subparagraph of this paragraph, including requests for opinions and interpretations concerning the Code of Official Conduct or any other statute or regulation under the jurisdiction of the Select Committee, if one member of the quorum is a Member of the Majority Party and one member of the quorum is a Member of the Minority Party. During the transaction of routine business any member of the Select Committee constituting the quorum shall have the right to postpone further discussion of a pending matter until such time as a majority of the members of the Select Committee are present. (3) Except for an adjudicatory review hearing under Rule 5 and any deposition taken outside the presence of a Member under Rule 6, one Member shall constitute a quorum for hearing testimony, provided that all Members have been given notice of the hearing and the Chairman has designated a Member of the Majority Party and the Vice Chairman has designated a Member of the Minority Party to be in attendance, either of whom in the absence of the other may constitute the quorum. (e) Order of Business: Questions as to the order of business and the procedure of the Committee shall in the first instance be decided by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, subject to reversal by a vote by a majority of the Committee. (f) Hearings Announcements: The Committee shall make public announcement of the date, place and subject matter of any hearing to be conducted by it at least one week before the commencement of that hearing, and shall publish such announcement in the Congressional Record. If the Committee determines that there is good cause to commence a hearing at an earlier date, such notice will be given at the earliest possible time. (g) Open and Closed Committee Meetings: Meetings of the Committee shall be open to the public or closed to the public (executive session), as determined under the provisions of paragraphs 5 (b) to (d) of Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate. Executive session meetings of the Committee shall be closed except to the members and the staff of the Committee. On the motion of any member, and with the approval of a majority of the Committee members present, other individuals may be admitted to an executive session meeting for a specific period or purpose. (h) Record of Testimony and Committee Action: An accurate stenographic or transcribed electronic record shall be kept of all Committee proceedings, whether in executive or public session. Such record shall include Senators' votes on any question on which a recorded vote is held. The record of a witness's testimony, whether in public or executive session, shall be made available for inspection to the witness or his counsel under Committee supervision; a copy of any testimony given by that witness in public session, or that part of the testimony given by the witness in executive session and subsequently quoted or made part of the record in a public session shall be made available to any witness if he so requests. (See Rule 5 on Procedures for Conducting Hearings.) (i) Secrecy of Executive Testimony and Action and of Complaint Proceedings: (1) All testimony and action taken in executive session shall be kept secret and shall not be released outside the Committee to any individual or group, whether governmental or private, without the approval of a majority of the Committee. (2) All testimony and action relating to a complaint or allegation shall be kept secret and shall not be released by the Committee to any individual or group, whether governmental or private, except the respondent, without the approval of a majority of the Committee, until such time as a report to the Senate is required under Senate Resolution 338, 88th Congress, as amended, or unless otherwise permitted under these Rules. (See Rule 8 on Procedures for Handling Committee Sensitive and Classified Materials.) (j) Release of Reports to Public: No information pertaining to, or copies of any Committee report, study, or other document which purports to express the view, findings, conclusions or recommendations of the Committee in connection with any of its activities or proceedings may be released to any individual or group whether governmental or private, without the authorization of the Committee. Whenever the Chairman or Vice Chairman is authorized to make any determination, then the determination may be released at his or her discretion. Each member of the Committee shall be given a reasonable opportunity to have separate views included as part of any Committee report. (See Rule 8 on Procedures for Handling Committee Sensitive and Classified Materials.) (k) Ineligibility or Disqualification of Members and Staff: (1) A member of the Committee shall be ineligible to participate in any Committee proceeding that relates specifically to any of the following: (A) a preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review relating to (i) the conduct of (I) such member; (II) any officer or employee the member supervises; or (ii) any complaint filed by the member; and (B) the determinations and recommendations of the Committee with respect to any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review described in subparagraph (A). For purposes of this paragraph, a member of the committee and an officer of the Senate shall be deemed to supervise any officer or employee consistent with the provision of paragraph 12 of rule XXXVII of the Standing Rules of the Senate. (2) If any Committee proceeding appears to relate to a member of the Committee in a manner described in subparagraph (1) of this paragraph, the staff shall prepare a report to the Chairman and Vice Chairman. If either the Chairman or the Vice Chairman concludes from the report that it appears that the member may be ineligible, the member shall be notified in writing of the nature of the particular proceeding and the reason that it appears that the member may be ineligible to participate in it. If the member agrees that he or she is ineligible, the member shall so notify the Chairman or Vice Chairman. If the member believes that he or she is not ineligible, he or she may explain the reasons to the Chairman and Vice Chairman, and if they both agree that the member is not ineligible, the member shall continue to serve. But if either the Chairman or Vice Chairman continues to believe that the member is ineligible, while the member believes that he or she is not ineligible, the matter shall be promptly referred to the Committee. The member shall present his or her arguments to the Committee in executive session. Any contested questions concerning a member's eligibility shall be decided by a majority vote of the Committee, meeting in executive session, with the member in question not participating. (3) A member of the Committee may, at the discretion of the member, disqualify himself or herself from participating in any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review pending before the Committee and the determinations and recommendations of the Committee with respect to any such preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review. (4) Whenever any member of the Committee is ineligible under paragraph (1) to participate in any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review, or disqualifies himself or herself under paragraph (3) from participating in any preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review, another Senator shall be appointed by the Senate to serve as a member of the Committee solely for purposes of such preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review and the determinations and recommendations of the Committee with respect to such preliminary inquiry or adjudicatory review. Any member of the Senate appointed for such purposes shall be of the same party as the member who is ineligible or disqualifies himself or herself. (5) The President of the Senate shall be given written notice of the ineligibility or disqualification of any member from any preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review, or other proceeding requiring the appointment of another member in accordance with subparagraph (k)(4). (6) A member of the Committee staff shall be ineligible to participate in any Committee proceeding that the staff director or outside counsel determines relates specifically to any of the following: (A) the staff member's own conduct; (B) the conduct of any employee that the staff member supervises; (C) the conduct of any Member, officer or employee for whom the staff member has worked for any substantial period; or (D) a complaint, sworn or unsworn, that was filed by the staff member. At the direction or with the consent of the staff director or outside counsel, a staff member may also be disqualified from participating in a Committee proceeding in other circumstances not listed above. (l) Recorded Votes: Any member may require a recorded vote on any matter. (m) Proxies; Recording Votes of Absent Members: (1) Proxy voting shall not be allowed when the question before the Committee is the initiation or continuation of a preliminary inquiry or an adjudicatory review, or the issuance of a report or recommendation related thereto concerning a Member or officer of the Senate. In any such case an absent member's vote may be announced solely for the purpose of recording the member's position and such announced votes shall not be counted for or against the motion. (2) On matters other than matters listed in paragraph (m)(1) above, the Committee may order that the record be held open for the vote of absentees or recorded proxy votes if the absent Committee member has been informed of the matter on which the vote occurs and has affirmatively requested the Chairman or Vice Chairman in writing that he be so recorded. (3) All proxies shall be in writing, and shall be delivered to the Chairman or Vice Chairman to be recorded. (4) Proxies shall not be considered for the purpose of establishing a quorum. (n) Approval of Blind Trusts Between Sessions and During Extended Recesses: During any period in which the Senate stands in adjournment between sessions of the Congress or stands in a recess scheduled to extend beyond fourteen days, the Chairman and Vice Chairman, or their designees, acting jointly, are authorized to approve or disapprove blind trusts under the provision of Rule XXXIV. (o) Committee Use of Services or Employees of Other Agencies and Departments: With the prior consent of the department or agency involved, the Committee may (1) utilize the services, information, or facilities of any such department or agency of the Government, and (2) employ on a reimbursable basis or otherwise the services of such personnel of any such department or agency as it deems advisable. With the consent of any other committee of the Senate, or any subcommittee, the Committee may utilize the facilities and the services of the staff of such other committee or subcommittee whenever the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee, acting jointly, determine that such action is necessary and appropriate. Rule 2: Procedures for Complaints, Allegations, or Information (a) Complaint, Allegation, or Information: Any member or staff member of the Committee shall report to the Committee, and any other person may report to the Committee, a sworn complaint or other allegation or information, alleging that any Senator, or officer, or employee of the Senate has violated a law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, or any rule or regulation of the Senate relating to the conduct of any individual in the performance of his or her duty as a Member, officer, or employee of the Senate, or has engaged in improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate. Such complaints or allegations or information may be reported to the Chairman, the Vice Chairman, a Committee member, or a Committee staff member. (b) Source of Complaint, Allegation, or Information: Complaints, allegations, and information to be reported to the Committee may be obtained from a variety of sources, including but not limited to the following: (1) sworn complaints, defined as a written statement of facts, submitted under penalty of perjury, within the personal knowledge of the complainant alleging a violation of law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, or any other rule or regulation of the Senate relating to the conduct of individuals in the performance of their duties as members, officers, or employees of the Senate; (2) anonymous or informal complaints; (3) information developed during a study or inquiry by the Committee or other committees or subcommittees of the Senate, including information obtained in connection with legislative or general oversight hearings; (4) information reported by the news media; or (5) information obtained from any individual, agency or department of the executive branch of the Federal Government. (c) Form and Content of Complaints: A complaint need not be sworn nor must it be in any particular form to receive Committee consideration, but the preferred complaint will: (1) state, whenever possible, the name, address, and telephone number of the party filing the complaint; (2) provide the name of each member, officer or employee of the Senate who is specifically alleged to have engaged in improper conduct or committed a violation; (3) state the nature of the alleged improper conduct or violation; (4) supply all documents in the possession of the party filing the complaint relevant to or in support of his or her allegations as an attachment to the complaint. Rule 3: Procedures for Conducting a Preliminary Inquiry (a) Definition of Preliminary Inquiry: A ``preliminary inquiry'' is a proceeding undertaken by the Committee following the receipt of a complaint or allegation of, or information about, misconduct by a Member, officer, or employee of the Senate to determine whether there is substantial credible evidence which provides substantial cause for the Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Committee has occurred. (b) Basis For Preliminary Inquiry: The Committee shall promptly commence a preliminary inquiry whenever it has received a sworn complaint, or other allegation of, or information about, alleged misconduct or violations pursuant to Rule 2. (c) Scope of Preliminary Inquiry: (1) The preliminary inquiry shall be of such duration and scope as is necessary to determine whether there is substantial credible evidence which provides substantial cause for the Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Committee has occurred. The Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, on behalf of the Committee may supervise and determine the appropriate duration, scope, and conduct of a preliminary inquiry. Whether a preliminary inquiry is conducted jointly by the Chairman and Vice Chairman or by the Committee as a whole, the day to day supervision of a preliminary inquiry rests with the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. (2) A preliminary inquiry may include any inquiries, interviews, sworn statements, depositions, or subpoenas deemed appropriate to obtain information upon which to make any determination provided for by this Rule. (d) Opportunity for Response: A preliminary inquiry may include an opportunity for any known respondent or his or her designated representative to present either a written or oral statement, or to respond orally to questions from the Committee. Such an oral statement or answers shall be transcribed and signed by the person providing the statement or answers. (e) Status Reports: The Committee staff or outside counsel shall periodically report to the Committee in the form and according to the schedule prescribed by the Committee. The reports shall be confidential. (f) Final Report: When the preliminary inquiry is completed, the staff or outside counsel shall make a confidential report, oral or written, to the Committee on findings and recommendations, as appropriate. (g) Committee Action: As soon as practicable following submission of the report on the preliminary inquiry, the Committee shall determine by a recorded vote whether there is substantial credible evidence which provides substantial cause for the Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Committee has occurred. The Committee may make any of the following determinations: (1) The Committee may determine that there is not such substantial credible evidence and, in such case, the Committee shall dismiss the matter. The Committee, or Chairman and Vice Chairman acting jointly on behalf of the Committee, may dismiss any matter which, after a preliminary inquiry, is determined to lack substantial merit. The Committee shall inform the complainant of the dismissal. (2) The Committee may determine that there is such substantial credible evidence, but that the alleged violation is inadvertent, technical, or otherwise of a deminimis nature. In such case, the Committee may dispose of the matter by issuing a public or private letter of admonition, which shall not be considered discipline and which shall not be subject to appeal to the Senate. The issuance of a letter of admonition must be approved by the affirmative recorded vote of no fewer than four members of the Committee voting. (3) The Committee may determine that there is such substantial credible evidence and that the matter cannot be appropriately disposed of under paragraph (2). In such case, the Committee shall promptly initiate an adjudicatory review in accordance with Rule 4. No adjudicatory review of conduct of a Member, officer, or employee of the Senate may be initiated except by the affirmative recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee. Rule 4: Procedures for Conducting an Adjudicatory Review (a) Definition of Adjudicatory Review: An ``adjudicatory review'' is a proceeding undertaken by the Committee after a finding, on the basis of a preliminary inquiry, that there is substantial cause for the Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Committee has occurred. (b) Scope of Adjudicatory Review: When the Committee decides to conduct an adjudicatory review, it shall be of such duration and scope as is necessary for the Committee to determine whether a violation within its jurisdiction has occurred. An adjudicatory review shall be conducted by outside counsel as authorized by section 3(b)(1) of Senate Resolution 338 unless the Committee determines not to use outside counsel. In the course of the adjudicatory review, designated outside counsel, or if the Committee determines not to use outside counsel, the Committee or its staff, may conduct any inquiries or interviews, take sworn statements, use compulsory process as described in Rule 6, or take any other actions that the Committee deems appropriate to secure the evidence necessary to make a determination. (c) Notice to Respondent: The Committee shall give written notice to any known respondent who is the subject of an adjudicatory review. The notice shall be sent to the respondent no later than five working days after the Committee has voted to conduct an adjudicatory review. The notice shall include a statement of the nature of the possible violation, and description of the evidence indicating that a possible violation occurred. The Committee may offer the respondent an opportunity to present a statement, orally or in writing, or to respond to questions from members of the Committee, the Committee staff, or outside counsel. (d) Right to a Hearing: The Committee shall accord a respondent an opportunity for a hearing before it recommends disciplinary action against that respondent to the Senate or before it imposes an order of restitution or reprimand (not requiring discipline by the full Senate). (e) Progress Reports to Committee: The Committee staff or outside counsel shall periodically report to the Committee concerning the progress of the adjudicatory review. Such reports shall be delivered to the Committee in the form and according to the schedule prescribed by the Committee, and shall be confidential. (f) Final Report of Adjudicatory Review to Committee: Upon completion of an adjudicatory review, including any hearings held pursuant to Rule 5, the outside counsel or the staff shall submit a confidential written report to the Committee, which shall detail the factual findings of the adjudicatory review and which may recommend disciplinary action, if appropriate. Findings of fact of the adjudicatory review shall be detailed in this report whether or not disciplinary action is recommended. (g) Committee Action: (1) As soon as practicable following submission of the report of the staff or outside counsel on the adjudicatory review, the Committee shall prepare and submit a report to the Senate, including a recommendation or proposed resolution to the Senate concerning disciplinary action, if appropriate. A report shall be issued, stating in detail the Committee's findings of fact, whether or not disciplinary action is recommended. The report shall also explain fully the reasons underlying the Committee's recommendation concerning disciplinary action, if any. No adjudicatory review of conduct of a Member, officer or employee of the Senate may be conducted, or report or resolution or recommendation relating to such an adjudicatory review of conduct may be made, except by the affirmative recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee. (2) Pursuant to S. Res. 338, as amended, section 2 (a), subsections (2), (3), & (4), after receipt of the report prescribed by paragraph (f) of this rule, the Committee may make any of the following recommendations for disciplinary action or issue an order for reprimand or restitution, as follows: (i) In the case of a Member, a recommendation to the Senate for expulsion, censure, payment of restitution, recommendation to a Member's party conference regarding the Member's seniority or positions of responsibility, or a combination of these; (ii) In the case of an officer or employee, a recommendation to the Senate of dismissal, suspension, payment of restitution, or a combination of these; (iii) In the case where the Committee determines, after according to the Member, officer, or employee due notice and opportunity for a hearing, that misconduct occurred warranting discipline less serious than discipline by the full Senate, and subject to the provisions of paragraph (h) of this rule relating to appeal, by a unanimous vote of six members order that a Member, officer or employee be reprimanded or pay restitution or both; (iv) In the case where the Committee determines that misconduct is inadvertent, technical, or otherwise of a de minimis nature, issue a public or private letter of admonition to a Member, officer or employee, which shall not be subject to appeal to the Senate. (3) In the case where the Committee determines, upon consideration of all the evidence, that the facts do not warrant a finding that there is substantial credible evidence which provides substantial cause for the Committee to conclude that a violation within the jurisdiction of the Committee has occurred, the Committee may dismiss the matter. (4) Promptly, after the conclusion of the adjudicatory review, the Committee's report and recommendation, if any, shall be forwarded to the Secretary of the Senate, and a copy shall be provided to the complainant and the respondent. The full report and recommendation, if any, shall be printed and made public, unless the Committee determines by the recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee that it should remain confidential. (h) Right of Appeal: (1) Any individual who is the subject of a reprimand or order of restitution, or both, pursuant to subsection (g)(2)(iii), may, within 30 days of the Committee's report to the Senate of its action imposing a reprimand or order of restitution, or both, appeal to the Senate by providing written notice of the appeal to the Committee and the presiding officer of the Senate. The presiding officer shall cause the notice of the appeal to be printed in the Congressional Record and the Senate Journal. (2) S. Res. 338 provides that a motion to proceed to consideration of an appeal pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be highly privileged and not debatable. If the motion to proceed to consideration of the appeal is agreed to, the appeal shall be decided on the basis of the Committee's report to the Senate. Debate on the appeal shall be limited to 10 hours, which shall be divided equally between, and controlled by, those favoring and those opposing the appeal. Rule 5: Procedures for Hearings (a) Right to Hearing: The Committee may hold a public or executive hearing in any preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review, or other proceeding. The Committee shall accord a respondent an opportunity for a hearing before it recommends disciplinary action against that respondent to the Senate or before it imposes on order of restitution or reprimand. (See Rule 4(d)). (b) Non-Public Hearings: The Committee may at any time during a hearing determine in accordance with paragraph 5(b) of Rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate whether to receive the testimony of specific witnesses in executive session. If a witness desires to express a preference for testifying in public or in executive session, he or she shall so notify the Committee at least five days before he or she is scheduled to testify. (c) Adjudicatory Hearings: The Committee may, by the recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee, designate any public or executive hearing as an adjudicatory hearing; and any hearing which is concerned with possible disciplinary action against a respondent or respondents designated by the Committee shall be an adjudicatory hearing. In any adjudicatory hearing, the procedures described in paragraph (j) shall apply. (d) Subpoena Power: The Committee may require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production of such correspondence, books, papers, documents or other articles as it deems advisable. (See Rule 6.) (e) Notice of Hearings: The Committee shall make public an announcement of the date, place, and subject matter of any hearing to be conducted by it, in accordance with Rule 1(f). (f) Presiding Officer: The Chairman shall preside over the hearings, or in his absence the Vice Chairman. If the Vice Chairman is also absent, a Committee member designated by the Chairman shall preside. If an oath or affirmation is required, it shall be administered to a witness by the Presiding Officer, or in his absence, by any Committee member. (g) Witnesses: (1) A subpoena or other request to testify shall be served on a witness sufficiently in advance of his or her scheduled appearance to allow the witness a reasonable period of time, as determined by the Committee, to prepare for the hearing and to employ counsel if desired. (2) The Committee may, by recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee, rule that no member of the Committee or staff or outside counsel shall make public the name of any witness subpoenaed by the Committee before the date of that witness's scheduled appearance, except as specifically authorized by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. (3) Any witness desiring to read a prepared or written statement in executive or public hearings shall file a copy of such statement with the Committee at least two working days in advance of the hearing at which the statement is to be presented. The Chairman and Vice Chairman shall determine whether such statements may be read or placed in the record of the hearing. (4) Insofar as practicable, each witness shall be permitted to present a brief oral opening statement, if he or she desires to do so. (h) Right To Testify: Any person whose name is mentioned or who is specifically identified or otherwise referred to in testimony or in statements made by a Committee member, staff member or outside counsel, or any witness, and who reasonably believes that the statement tends to adversely affect his or her reputation may-- (1) Request to appear personally before the Committee to testify in his or her own behalf; or (2) File a sworn statement of facts relevant to the testimony or other evidence or statement of which he or she complained. Such request and such statement shall be submitted to the Committee for its consideration and action. (i) Conduct of Witnesses and Other Attendees: The Presiding Officer may punish any breaches of order and decorum by censure and exclusion from the hearings. The Committee, by majority vote, may recommend to the Senate that the offender be cited for contempt of Congress. (j) Adjudicatory Hearing Procedures: (1) Notice of hearings: A copy of the public announcement of an adjudicatory hearing, required by paragraph (e), shall be furnished together with a copy of these Rules to all witnesses at the time that they are subpoenaed or otherwise summoned to testify. (2) Preparation for adjudicatory hearings: (A) At least five working days prior to the commencement of an adjudicatory hearing, the Committee shall provide the following information and documents to the respondent, if any: (i) a list of proposed witnesses to be called at the hearing; (ii) copies of all documents expected to be introduced as exhibits at the hearing; and (iii) a brief statement as to the nature of the testimony expected to be given by each witness to be called at the hearing. (B) At least two working days prior to the commencement of an adjudicatory hearing, the respondent, if any, shall provide the information and documents described in divisions, (i), (ii) and (iii) of subparagraph (A) to the Committee. (C) At the discretion of the Committee, the information and documents to be exchanged under this paragraph shall be subject to an appropriate agreement limiting access and disclosure. (D) If a respondent refuses to provide the information and documents to the Committee (see (A) and (B) of this subparagraph), or if a respondent or other individual violates an agreement limiting access and disclosure, the Committee, by majority vote, may recommend to the Senate that the offender be cited for contempt of Congress. (3) Swearing of witnesses: All witnesses who testify at adjudicatory hearings shall be sworn unless the Presiding Officer, for good cause, decides that a witness does not have to be sworn. (4) Right to counsel: Any witness at an adjudicatory hearing may be accompanied by counsel of his or her own choosing, who shall be permitted to advise the witness of his or her legal rights during the testimony. (5) Right to cross-examine and call witnesses: (A) In adjudicatory hearings, any respondent and any other person who obtains the permission of the Committee, may personally or through counsel cross-examine witnesses called by the Committee and may call witnesses in his or her own behalf. (B) A respondent may apply to the Committee for the issuance of subpoenas for the appearance of witnesses or the production of documents on his or her behalf. An application shall be approved upon a concise showing by the respondent that the proposed testimony or evidence is relevant and appropriate, as determined by the Chairman and Vice Chairman. (C) With respect to witnesses called by a respondent, or other individual given permission by the Committee, each such witness shall first be examined by the party who called the witness or by that party's counsel. (D) At least one working day before a witness's scheduled appearance, a witness or a witness's counsel may submit to the Committee written questions proposed to be asked of that witness. If the Committee determines that it is necessary, such questions may be asked by any member of the Committee, or by any Committee staff member if directed by a Committee member. The witness or witness's counsel may also submit additional sworn testimony for the record within twenty-four hours after the last day that the witness has testified. The insertion of such testimony in that day's record is subject to the approval of the Chairman and Vice Chairman acting jointly within five days after the testimony is received. (6) Admissibility of evidence: (A) The object of the hearing shall be to ascertain the truth. Any evidence that may be relevant and probative shall be admissible, unless privileged under the Federal Rules of Evidence. Rules of evidence shall not be applied strictly but the Presiding Officer shall exclude irrelevant or unduly repetitious testimony. Objections going only to the weight that should be given evidence will not justify its exclusion. (B) The Presiding Officer shall rule upon any question of the admissibility of testimony or other evidence presented to the Committee. Such rulings shall be final unless reversed or modified by a recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee before the recess of that day's hearings. (C) Notwithstanding paragraphs (A) and (B), in any matter before the Committee involving allegations of sexual discrimination, including sexual harassment, or sexual misconduct, by a Member, officer, or employee, within the jurisdiction of the Committee, the Committee shall be guided by the standards and procedures of Rule 412 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, except that the Committee may admit evidence subject to the provisions of this paragraph only upon a determination of not less than four members of the full Committee that the interests of justice require that such evidence be admitted. (7) Supplementary hearing procedures: The Committee may adopt any additional special hearing procedures that it deems necessary or appropriate to a particular adjudicatory hearing. Copies of such supplementary procedures shall be furnished to witnesses and respondents, and shall be made available upon request to any member of the public. (k) Transcripts: (1) An accurate stenographic or recorded transcript shall be made of all public and executive hearings. Any member of the Committee, Committee staff member, outside counsel retained by the Committee, or witness may examine a copy of the transcript retained by the Committee of his or her own remarks and may suggest to the official reporter any typographical or transcription errors. If the reporter declines to make the requested corrections, the member, staff member, outside counsel or witness may request a ruling by the Chairman and Vice Chairman acting jointly. Any member or witness shall return the transcript with suggested corrections to the Committee offices within five working days after receipt of the transcript, or as soon thereafter as is practicable. If the testimony was given in executive session, the member or witness may only inspect the transcript at a location determined by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. Any questions arising with respect to the processing and correction of transcripts shall be decided by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. (2) Except for the record of a hearing which is closed to the public, each transcript shall be printed as soon as is practicable after receipt of the corrected version. The Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, may order the transcript of a hearing to be printed without the corrections of a member or witness if they determine that such member or witness has been afforded a reasonable time to correct such transcript and such transcript has not been returned within such time. (3) The Committee shall furnish each witness, at no cost, one transcript copy of that witness's testimony given at a public hearing. If the testimony was given in executive session, then a transcript copy shall be provided upon request, subject to appropriate conditions and restrictions prescribed by the Chairman and Vice Chairman. If any individual violates such conditions and restrictions, the Committee may recommend by majority vote that he or she be cited for contempt of Congress. Rule 6: Subpoenas and Depositions (a) Subpoenas: (1) Authorization for issuance: Subpoenas for the attendance and testimony of witnesses at depositions or hearings, and subpoenas for the production of documents and tangible things at depositions, hearings, or other times and places designated therein, may be authorized for issuance by either (A) a majority vote of the Committee, or (B) the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, at any time during a preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review, or other proceeding. (2) Signature and service: All subpoenas shall be signed by the Chairman or the Vice Chairman and may be served by any person eighteen years of age or older, who is designated by the Chairman or Vice Chairman. Each subpoena shall be served with a copy of the Rules of the Committee and a brief statement of the purpose of the Committee's proceeding. (3) Withdrawal of subpoena: The Committee, by recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee, may withdraw any subpoena authorized for issuance by it or authorized for issuance by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. The Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, may withdraw any subpoena authorized for issuance by them. (b) Depositions: (1) Persons authorized to take depositions: Depositions may be taken by any member of the Committee designated by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, or by any other person designated by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, including outside counsel, Committee staff, other employees of the Senate, or government employees detailed to the Committee. (2) Deposition notices: Notices for the taking of depositions shall be authorized by the Committee, or the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, and issued by the Chairman, Vice Chairman, or a Committee staff member or outside counsel designated by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. Depositions may be taken at any time during a preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review or other proceeding. Deposition notices shall specify a time and place for examination. Unless otherwise specified, the deposition shall be in private, and the testimony taken and documents produced shall be deemed for the purpose of these rules to have been received in a closed or executive session of the Committee. The Committee shall not initiate procedures leading to criminal or civil enforcement proceedings for a witness's failure to appear, or to testify, or to produce documents, unless the deposition notice was accompanied by a subpoena authorized for issuance by the Committee, or the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. (3) Counsel at depositions: Witnesses may be accompanied at a deposition by counsel to advise them of their rights. (4) Deposition procedure: Witnesses at depositions shall be examined upon oath administered by an individual authorized by law to administer oaths, or administered by any member of the Committee if one is present. Questions may be propounded by any person or persons who are authorized to take depositions for the Committee. If a witness objects to a question and refuses to testify, or refuses to produce a document, any member of the Committee who is present may rule on the objection and, if the objection is overruled, direct the witness to answer the question or produce the document. If no member of the Committee is present, the individual who has been designated by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, to take the deposition may proceed with the deposition, or may, at that time or at a subsequent time, seek a ruling by telephone or otherwise on the objection from the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Committee, who may refer the matter to the Committee or rule on the objection. If the Chairman or Vice Chairman, or the Committee upon referral, overrules the objection, the Chairman, Vice Chairman, or the Committee as the case may be, may direct the witness to answer the question or produce the document. The Committee shall not initiate procedures leading to civil or criminal enforcement unless the witness refuses to testify or produce documents after having been directed to do so. (5) Filing of depositions: Deposition testimony shall be transcribed or electronically recorded. If the deposition is transcribed, the individual administering the oath shall certify on the transcript that the witness was duly sworn in his or her presence and the transcriber shall certify that the transcript is a true record of the testimony. The transcript with these certifications shall be filed with the chief clerk of the Committee, and the witness shall be furnished with access to a copy at the Committee's offices for review. Upon inspecting the transcript, within a time limit set by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, a witness may request in writing changes in the transcript to correct errors in transcription. The witness may also bring to the attention of the Committee errors of fact in the witness's testimony by submitting a sworn statement about those facts with a request that it be attached to the transcript. The Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, may rule on the witness's request, and the changes or attachments allowed shall be certified by the Committee's chief clerk. If the witness fails to make any request under this paragraph within the time limit set, this fact shall be noted by the Committee's chief clerk. Any person authorized by the Committee may stipulate with the witness to changes in this procedure. Rule 7: Violations of Law; Perjury; Legislative Recommendations; Educational Mandate; and Applicable Rules and Standards of Conduct (a) Violations of Law: Whenever the Committee determines by the recorded vote of not less than four members of the full Committee that there is reason to believe that a violation of law, including the provision of false information to the Committee, may have occurred, it shall report such possible violation to the proper Federal and state authorities. (b) Perjury: Any person who knowingly and willfully swears falsely to a sworn complaint or any other sworn statement to the Committee does so under penalty of perjury. The Committee may refer any such case to the Attorney General for prosecution. (c) Legislative Recommendations: The Committee shall recommend to the Senate by report or resolution such additional rules, regulations, or other legislative measures as it determines to be necessary or desirable to ensure proper standards of conduct by Members, officers, or employees of the Senate. The Committee may conduct such preliminary inquiries as it deems necessary to prepare such a report or resolution, including the holding of hearings in public or executive session and the use of subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses or the production of materials. The Committee may make legislative recommendations as a result of its findings in a preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review, or other proceeding. (d) Educational Mandate; The Committee shall develop and implement programs and materials designed to educate Members, officers, and employees about the laws, rules, regulations, and standards of conduct applicable to such individuals in the performance of their duties. (e) Applicable Rules and Standards of Conduct: (1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no adjudicatory review shall be initiated of any alleged violation of any law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, rule, or regulation which was not in effect at the time the alleged violation occurred. No provisions of the Senate Code of Official Conduct shall apply to or require disclosure of any act, relationship, or transaction which occurred prior to the effective date of the applicable provision of the Code. (2) The Committee may initiate an adjudicatory review of any alleged violation of a rule or law which was in effect prior to enactment of the Senate Code of Official Conduct if the alleged violation occurred while such rule or law was in effect and the violation was not a matter resolved in the merits by the predecessor Committee. Rule 8: Procedures for Handling Committee Sensitive and Classified Materials (a) Procedures for Handling Committee Sensitive Materials: (1) Committee Sensitive information or material is information or material in the possession of the Select Committee on Ethics which pertains to illegal or improper conduct by a present or former Member, officer, or employee of the Senate; to allegations or accusations of such conduct; to any resulting preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review or other proceeding by the Select Committee on Ethics into such allegations or conduct; to the investigative techniques and procedures of the Select Committee on Ethics; or to the information or material designated by the staff director, or outside counsel designated by the Chairman and Vice Chairman. (2) The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee shall establish such procedures as may be necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of Committee Sensitive information in the possession of the Committee or its staff. Procedures for protecting Committee Sensitive materials shall be in writing and shall be given to each Committee staff member. (b) Procedures for Handling Classified Materials: (1) Classified information or material is information or material which is specifically designated as classified under the authority of Executive Order 11652 requiring protection of such information or material from unauthorized disclosure in order to prevent damage to the United States. (2) The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee shall establish such procedures as may be necessary to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of classified information in the possession of the Committee or its staff. Procedure for handling such information shall be in writing and a copy of the procedures shall be given to each staff member cleared for access to classified information. (3) Each member of the Committee shall have access to classified material in the Committee's possession. Only Committee staff members with appropriate security clearances and a need-to-know, as approved by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, shall have access to classified information in the Committee's possession. (c) Procedures for Handling Committee Sensitive and Classified Documents: (1) Committee Sensitive documents and materials shall be stored in the Committee's offices, with appropriate safeguards for maintaining the security of such documents or materials. Classified documents and materials shall be further segregated in the Committee's offices in secure filing safes. Removal from the Committee offices of such documents or materials is prohibited except as necessary for use in, or preparation for, interviews or Committee meetings, including the taking of testimony, or as otherwise specifically approved by the staff director or by outside counsel designated by the Chairman and Vice Chairman. (2) Each member of the Committee shall have access to all materials in the Committee's possession. The staffs of members shall not have access to Committee Sensitive or classified documents and materials without the specific approval in each instance of the Chairman, and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. Members may examine such materials in the Committee's offices. If necessary, requested materials may be hand delivered by a member of the Committee staff to the member of the Committee, or to a staff person(s) specifically designated by the member, for the Member's or designated staffer's examination. A member of the Committee who has possession of Committee Sensitive documents or materials shall take appropriate safeguards for maintaining the security of such documents or materials in the possession of the Member or his or her designated staffer. (3) Committee Sensitive documents that are provided to a Member of the Senate in connection with a complaint that has been filed against the Member shall be hand delivered to the Member or to the Member's Chief of Staff or Administrative Assistant. Committee Sensitive documents that are provided to a Member of the Senate who is the subject of a preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review, or other proceeding, shall be hand delivered to the Member or to his or her specifically designated representative. (4) Any Member of the Senate who is not a member of the Committee and who seeks access to any Committee Sensitive or classified documents or materials, other than documents or materials which are matters of public record, shall request access in writing. The Committee shall decide by majority vote whether to make documents or materials available. If access is granted, the Member shall not disclose the information except as authorized by the Committee. (5) Whenever the Committee makes Committee Sensitive or classified documents or materials available to any Member of the Senate who is not a member of the Committee, or to a staff person of a Committee member in response to a specific request to the Chairman and Vice Chairman, a written record shall be made identifying the Member of the Senate requesting such documents or materials and describing what was made available and to whom. (d) Non-Disclosure Policy and Agreement: (1) Except as provided in the last sentence of this paragraph, no member of the Select Committee on Ethics, its staff or any person engaged by contract or otherwise to perform services for the Select Committee on Ethics shall release, divulge, publish, reveal by writing, word, conduct, or disclose in any way, in whole, or in part, or by way of summary, during tenure with the Select Committee on Ethics or anytime thereafter, any testimony given before the Select Committee on Ethics in executive session (including the name of any witness who appeared or was called to appear in executive session), any classified or Committee Sensitive information, document or material, received or generated by the Select Committee on Ethics or any classified or Committee Sensitive information which may come into the possession of such person during tenure with the Select Committee on Ethics or its staff. Such information, documents, or material may be released to an official of the executive branch properly cleared for access with a need-to-know, for any purpose or in connection with any proceeding, judicial or otherwise, as authorized by the Select Committee on Ethics, or in the event of termination of the Select Committee on Ethics, in such a manner as may be determined by its successor or by the Senate. (2) No member of the Select Committee on Ethics staff or any person engaged by contract or otherwise to perform services for the Select Committee on Ethics, shall be granted access to classified or Committee Sensitive information or material in the possession of the Select Committee on Ethics unless and until such person agrees in writing, as a condition of employment, to the non-disclosure policy. The agreement shall become effective when signed by the Chairman and Vice Chairman on behalf of the Committee. Rule 9: Broadcasting and News Coverage of Committee Proceedings (a) Whenever any hearing or meeting of the Committee is open to the public, the Committee shall permit that hearing or meeting to be covered in whole or in part, by television broadcast, radio broadcast, still photography, or by any other methods of coverage, unless the Committee decides by recorded vote of not less than four members of the Committee that such coverage is not appropriate at a particular hearing or meeting. (b) Any witness served with a subpoena by the Committee may request not to be photographed at any hearing or to give evidence or testimony while the broadcasting, reproduction, or coverage of that hearing, by radio, television, still photography, or other methods is occurring. At the request of any such witness who does not wish to be subjected to radio, television, still photography, or other methods of coverage, and subject to the approval of the Committee, all lenses shall be covered and all microphones used for coverage turned off. (c) If coverage is permitted, it shall be in accordance with the following requirements: (1) Photographers and reporters using mechanical recording, filming, or broadcasting apparatus shall position their equipment so as not to interfere with the seating, vision, and hearing of the Committee members and staff, or with the orderly process of the meeting or hearing. (2) If the television or radio coverage of the hearing or meeting is to be presented to the public as live coverage, that coverage shall be conducted and presented without commercial sponsorship. (3) Personnel providing coverage by the television and radio media shall be currently accredited to the Radio and Television Correspondents' Galleries. (4) Personnel providing coverage by still photography shall be currently accredited to the Press Photographers' Gallery Committee of Press Photographers. (5) Personnel providing coverage by the television and radio media and by still photography shall conduct themselves and the coverage activities in an orderly and unobtrusive manner. rule 10: procedures for advisory opinions (a) When Advisory Opinions Are Rendered: (1) The Committee shall render an advisory opinion, in writing within a reasonable time, in response to a written request by a Member or officer of the Senate or a candidate for nomination for election, or election to the Senate, concerning the application of any law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, or any rule or regulation of the Senate within the Committee's jurisdiction, to a specific factual situation pertinent to the conduct or proposed conduct of the person seeking the advisory opinion. (2) The Committee may issue an advisory opinion in writing within a reasonable time in response to a written request by any employee of the Senate concerning the application of any law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, or any rule or regulation of the Senate within the Committee's jurisdiction, to a specific factual situation pertinent to the conduct or proposed conduct of the person seeking the advisory opinion. (b) Form of Request: A request for an advisory opinion shall be directed in writing to the Chairman of the Committee and shall include a complete and accurate statement of the specific factual situation with respect to which the request is made as well as the specific question or questions which the requestor wishes the Committee to address. (c) Opportunity for Comment: (1) The Committee will provide an opportunity for any interested party to comment on a request for an advisory opinion. (A) which requires an interpretation on a significant question of first impression that will affect more than a few individuals; or (B) when the Committee determines that comments from interested parties would be of assistance. (2) Notice of any such request for an advisory opinion shall be published in the Congressional Record, with appropriate deletions to insure confidentiality, and interested parties will be asked to submit their comments in writing to the Committee within ten days. (3) All relevant comments received on a timely basis will be considered. (d) Issuance of an Advisory Opinion: (1) The Committee staff shall prepare a proposed advisory opinion in draft form which will first be reviewed and approved by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, and will be presented to the Committee for final action. If (A) the Chairman and Vice Chairman cannot agree, or (B) either the Chairman or Vice Chairman requests that it be taken directly to the Committee, then the proposed advisory opinion shall be referred to the Committee for its decision. (2) An advisory opinion shall be issued only by the affirmative recorded vote of a majority of the members voting. (3) Each advisory opinion issued by the Committee shall be promptly transmitted for publication in the Congressional Record after appropriate deletions are made to insure confidentiality. The Committee may at any time revise, withdraw, or elaborate on any advisory opinion. (e) Reliance on Advisory Opinions: (1) Any advisory opinion issued by the Committee under Senate Resolution 338, 88th Congress, as amended, and the rules may be relied upon by-- (A) Any person involved in the specific transaction or activity with respect to which such advisory opinion is rendered if the request for such advisory opinion included a complete and accurate statement of the specific factual situation; and (B) any person involved in any specific transaction or activity which is indistinguishable in all its material aspects from the transaction or activity with respect to which such advisory opinion is rendered. (2) Any person who relies upon any provision or finding of an advisory opinion in accordance with the provisions of Senate Resolution 338, 88th Congress, as amended, and of the rules, and who acts in good faith in accordance with the provisions and findings of such advisory opinion shall not, as a result of any such act, be subject to any sanction by the Senate. rule 11: procedures for interpretative rulings (a) Basis for Interpretative Rulings: Senate Resolution 338, 88th Congress, as amended, authorizes the Committee to issue interpretative rulings explaining and clarifying the application of any law, the Code of Official Conduct, or any rule or regulation of the Senate within its jurisdiction. The Committee also may issue such rulings clarifying or explaining any rule or regulation of the Select Committee on Ethics. (b) Request for Ruling: A request for such a ruling must be directed in writing to the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Committee. (c) Adoption of Ruling: (1) The Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, shall issue a written interpretive ruling in response to any such request, unless-- (A) they cannot agree, (B) it requires an interpretation of a significant question of first impression, or (C) either requests that it be taken to the Committee, in which event the request shall be directed to the Committee for a ruling. (2) A ruling on any request taken to the Committee under subparagraph (1) shall be adopted by a majority of the members voting and the ruling shall then be issued by the Chairman and Vice Chairman. (d) Publication of Ruling: The Committee will publish in the Congressional Record, after making appropriate deletions to ensure confidentiality, any interpretative rulings issued under this Rule which the Committee determines may be of assistance or guidance to other Members, officers or employees. The Committee may at any time revise, withdraw, or elaborate on interpretative rulings. (e) Reliance on Rulings: Whenever an individual can demonstrate to the Committee's satisfaction that his or her conduct was in good faith reliance on an interpretative ruling issued in accordance with this Rule, the Committee will not recommend sanctions to the Senate as a result of such conduct. (f) Rulings by Committee Staff: The Committee staff is not authorized to make rulings or give advice, orally or in writing, which binds the Committee in any way. rule 12: procedures for complaints involving improper use of the mailing frank (a) Authority To Receive Complaints: The Committee is directed by section 6(b) of Public Law 93-191 to receive and dispose of complaints that a violation of the use of the mailing frank has occurred or is about to occur by a Member or officer of the Senate or by a surviving spouse of a Member. All such complaints will be processed in accordance with the provisions of these Rules, except as provided in paragraph (b). (b) Disposition of Complaints: (1) The Committee may dispose of any such complaint by requiring restitution of the cost of the mailing, pursuant to the franking statue, if it finds that the franking violation was the result of a mistake. (2) Any complaint disposed of by restitution that is made after the Committee has formally commenced an adjudicatory review, must be summarized, together with the disposition, in a report to the Senate, as appropriate. (3) If a complaint is disposed of by restitution, the complainant, if any, shall be notified of the disposition in writing. (c) Advisory Opinions and Interpretative Rulings: Requests for advisory opinions or interpretative rulings involving franking questions shall be processed in accordance with Rules 10 and 11. rule 13: procedures for waivers (a) Authority for Waivers: The Committee is authorized to grant a waiver under the following provisions of the Standing Rules of the Senate: (1) Section 101(h) of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, as amended (Rule XXXIV), relating to the filing of financial disclosure reports by individuals who are expected to perform or who have performed the duties of their offices or positions for less than one hundred and thirty days in a calendar year; (2) Section 102(a)(2)(D) of the Ethics in Government Act, as amended (Rule XXXIV), relating to the reporting of gifts; (3) Paragraph 1 of Rule XXXV relating to acceptance of gifts; or (4) Paragraph 5 of Rule XLI relating to applicability of any of the provisions of the Code of Official Conduct to an employee of the Senate hired on a per diem basis. (b) Requests for Waivers: A request for a waiver under paragraph (a) must be directed to the Chairman or Vice Chairman in writing and must specify the nature of the waiver being sought and explain in detail the facts alleged to justify a waiver. In the case of a request submitted by an employee, the views of his or her supervisor (as determined under paragraph 12 of Rule XXXVII of the Standing Rules of the Senate) should be included with the waiver request. (c) Ruling: The Committee shall rule on a waiver request by recorded vote with a majority of those voting affirming the decision. With respect to an individual's request for a waiver in connection with the acceptance or reporting the value of gifts on the occasion of the individual's marriage, the Chairman and the Vice Chairman, acting jointly, may rule on the waiver. (d) Availability of Waiver Determinations: A brief description of any waiver granted by the Committee, with appropriate deletions to ensure confidentiality, shall be made available for review upon request in the Committee office. Waivers granted by the Committee pursuant to the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, as amended, may only be granted pursuant to a publicly available request as required by the Act. rule 14: definition of ``officer or employee'' (a) As used in the applicable resolutions and in these rules and procedures, the term ``officer or employee of the Senate'' means: (1) An elected officer of the Senate who is not a Member of the Senate; (2) An employee of the Senate, any committee or subcommittee of the Senate, or any Member of the Senate; (3) The Legislative Counsel of the Senate or any employee of his office; (4) An Official Reporter of Debates of the Senate and any person employed by the Official Reporters of Debates of the Senate in connection with the performance of their official duties; (5) A member of the Capitol Police force whose compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate; (6) An employee of the Vice President, if such employee's compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate; (7) An employee of a joint committee of the Congress whose compensation is disbursed by the Secretary of the Senate; (8) An officer or employee of any department or agency of the Federal Government whose services are being utilized on a full-time and continuing basis by a Member, officer, employee, or committee of the Senate in accordance with Rule XLI(3) of the Standing Rules of the Senate; and (9) Any other individual whose full-time services are utilized for more than ninety days in a calendar year by a Member, officer, employee, or committee of the Senate in the conduct of official duties in accordance with Rule XLI(4) of the Standing Rules of the Senate. Rule 15: Committee Staff (a) Committee Policy: (1) The staff is to be assembled and retained as a permanent, professional, nonpartisan staff. (2) Each member of the staff shall be professional and demonstrably qualified for the position for which he or she is hired. (3) The staff as a whole and each member of the staff shall perform all official duties in a nonpartisan manner. (4) No member of the staff shall engage in any partisan political activity directly affecting any congressional or presidential election. (5) No member of the staff or outside counsel may accept public speaking engagements or write for publication on any subject that is in any way related to his or her employment or duties with the Committee without specific advance permission from the Chairman and Vice Chairman. (6) No member of the staff may make public, without Committee approval, any Committee Sensitive or classified information, documents, or other material obtained during the course of his or her employment with the Committee. (b) Appointment of Staff: (1) The appointment of all staff members shall be approved by the Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly. (2) The Committee may determine by majority vote that it is necessary to retain staff members, including staff recommended by a special counsel, for the purpose of a particular preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review, or other proceeding. Such staff shall be retained only for the duration of that particular undertaking. (3) The Committee is authorized to retain and compensate counsel not employed by the Senate (or by any department or agency of the Executive Branch of the Government) whenever the Committee determines that the retention of outside counsel is necessary or appropriate for any action regarding any complaint or allegation, preliminary inquiry, adjudicatory review, or other proceeding, which in the determination of the Committee, is more appropriately conducted by counsel not employed by the Government of the United States as a regular employee. The Committee shall retain and compensate outside counsel to conduct any adjudicatory review undertaken after a preliminary inquiry, unless the Committee determines that the use of outside counsel is not appropriate in the particular case. (c) Dismissal of Staff: A staff member may not be removed for partisan, political reasons, or merely as a consequence of the rotation of the Committee membership. The Chairman and Vice Chairman, acting jointly, shall approve the dismissal of any staff member. (d) Staff Works for Committee as a Whole: All staff employed by the Committee or housed in Committee offices shall work for the Committee as a whole, under the general direction of the Chairman and Vice Chairman, and the immediate direction of the staff director or outside counsel. (e) Notice of Summons To Testify: Each member of the Committee staff or outside counsel shall immediately notify the Committee in the event that he or she is called upon by a properly constituted authority to testify or provide confidential information obtained as a result of and during his or her employment with the Committee. Rule 16: Changes in Supplementary Procedural Rules (a) Adoption of Changes in Supplementary Rules: The Rules of the Committee, other than rules established by statute, or by the Standing Rules and Standing Orders of the Senate, may be modified, amended, or suspended at any time, pursuant to a recorded vote of not less than four members of the full Committee taken at a meeting called with due notice when prior written notice of the proposed change has been provided each member of the Committee. (b) Publication: Any amendments adopted to the Rules of this Committee shall be published in the Congressional Record in accordance with Rule XXVI(2) of the Standing Rules of the Senate.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, Today I rise in support of the Rural Education Initiative introduced by Senator Collins. I am also pleased to join my other colleagues from the Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee in support of this bill. In a time when the education of our nation's youth is a priority, we need to make sure that all schools have the opportunity to improve and reform. This legislation does just that. The Rural Education Initiative Act will allow small rural schools to make better use of federal education dollars. In Kansas, 46 percent of our school districts have fewer than 600 students. In Utica, Kansas, in the Nes Tre La Go Unified School District number 301, there are 34 elementary students and 39 high school students that make up the entire enrollment. Districts like these in Kansas and other rural areas face multiple obstacles when obtaining and utilizing federal funds. First, they seldom receive enough money from any single grant to make a lasting and measurable impact on school improvement. Grants are based on school enrollment and the funds doled out to these small districts are rarely enough. This bill would allow the merging of splintered federal funds so that grant money can be used effectively to meet local education priorities. District are granted the freedom to spend the funds as they see fit. Second, small rural districts do not have the manpower to apply for competitive grants. This bill provides a formula grant as an option instead of limiting districts to the lengthy and involved application process for ESEA competitive grant programs. Under this formula, districts don't have to strain their resources simply applying for federal funds. With this reform and flexibility there will be accountability. Districts will be required to demonstrate improved student performance using tests they already administer to assess student achievement. This bill abolishes undue obstacles rural districts face as they try to improve the quality of education in their own schools. I urge my colleagues to support this common sense legislation and allow small rural districts to obtain federal funds and use them to meet their own objectives.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, Today I rise in support of the Rural Education Initiative introduced by Senator Collins. I am also pleased to join my other colleagues from the Health Education Labor and Pensions Committee in support of this bill. In a time when the education of our nation's youth is a priority, we need to make sure that all schools have the opportunity to improve and reform. This legislation does just that. The Rural Education Initiative Act will allow small rural schools to make better use of federal education dollars. In Kansas, 46 percent of our school districts have fewer than 600 students. In Utica, Kansas, in the Nes Tre La Go Unified School District number 301, there are 34 elementary students and 39 high school students that make up the entire enrollment. Districts like these in Kansas and other rural areas face multiple obstacles when obtaining and utilizing federal funds. First, they seldom receive enough money from any single grant to make a lasting and measurable impact on school improvement. Grants are based on school enrollment and the funds doled out to these small districts are rarely enough. This bill would allow the merging of splintered federal funds so that grant money can be used effectively to meet local education priorities. District are granted the freedom to spend the funds as they see fit. Second, small rural districts do not have the manpower to apply for competitive grants. This bill provides a formula grant as an option instead of limiting districts to the lengthy and involved application process for ESEA competitive grant programs. Under this formula, districts don't have to strain their resources simply applying for federal funds. With this reform and flexibility there will be accountability. Districts will be required to demonstrate improved student performance using tests they already administer to assess student achievement. This bill abolishes undue obstacles rural districts face as they try to improve the quality of education in their own schools. I urge my colleagues to support this common sense legislation and allow small rural districts to obtain federal funds and use them to meet their own objectives.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise today once again to introduce legislation to enhance trade provisions from Title Nine of the fiscal year 2001 agriculture appropriations bill. The legislation that I join with my colleagues to introduce today, the Cuba Food & Medicine Access Act of 2001, exempts, among other things, the sale of agricultural commodities from the financing and licensing restrictions of Title Nine of last year's agriculture appropriations bill, also known as the Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act. Last week, Senator Dorgan and I introduced similar corrective legislation. Title Nine of the fiscal year 2001 agriculture appropriations bill made significant progress toward ending the misguided policy of using unilateral food sanctions to isolate or punish so-called ``countries of concern''. Title Nine holds that ``The President shall terminate any unilateral agricultural sanction or unilateral medical sanction that is in effect as of the date of enactment of this Act.'' That is indeed progress, Mr. President. As I noted last week with my friend from North Dakota, however, Title Nine prohibits basic facilitators to trade--financing and export promotion. The Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act effectively thwarts U.S. agricultural trade with Cuba. It is that reality that prompts me to introduce and support as many legislative vehicles as I can toward repealing the prohibitions in last year's bill and opening the Cuban market to American agricultural commodities. There has been much talk about the importance of American tourist travel to Cuba--this is true and I have stated it repeatedly. The Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act's tourist travel ban stifles the most powerful influence on Cuban society: American culture and perspective, both economic and political. Consistent with the Dorgan-Roberts bill introduced last week, the codification of tourist travel restrictions is repealed under the Cuba Food & Medicine Access Act of 2001 as are restrictions on the sale of medicine and medical products. Further, the trade of both food and medicine is enhanced by nullifying a provision of the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992, which prohibits ships entering ports in Cuba from visiting U.S. ports for at least 180 days without a special license. Today, however, I want to place more emphasis on the agricultural trade issue. The U.S. cannot afford to rule out any market for our agricultural commodities. Now more than ever, as new markets develop and our competitors seize those opportunities, it makes no sense to preclude the use of export promotion programs nor outlaw private U.S. financing. It is nonsense to isolate our farmers in this fashion. Section 908 of the fiscal year 2001 agriculture appropriations bill reads ``no United States Government assistance, including United States foreign assistance, United States export assistance, and any United States credit or guarantees shall be available for exports to Cuba.'' Section 908 goes on to state, incredibly, that ``no United States person may provide payment or financing terms for sales of agricultural commodities or products to Cuba or any person in Cuba.'' It's quite clear, Mr. President, the intent of this provision is to keep the Cuban market cut off from America's farmers. This is unacceptable. If it's not to keep the Cuban market cut off, then what is the policy? What are our farmers supposed to do when faced with this kind of contradictory and politicized language: You are permitted to sell to Cuba but don't bother trying? We are either going to encourage and facilitate global agricultural trade or we are going to discourage and complicate global agricultural trade. You can't have it both ways. Why is this significant in regards to Cuba? Let us sample some recent statistics provided by the U.S.-Cuba Trade & Economic Council, based in New York City: Wheat exports from Canada to Cuba in 1999 and 2000-- 730,000 tons; corn exports from China to Cuba in 2000--26,101 tons; and rice exports from China to Cuba in 2000--225,510 tons. No, Cuba is not the largest market, Mr. President, but the point is, our farmers should be able to compete for that business. It's our obligation to at least permit such an opportunity.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise today once again to introduce legislation to enhance trade provisions from Title Nine of the fiscal year 2001 agriculture appropriations bill. The legislation that I join with my colleagues to introduce today, the Cuba Food & Medicine Access Act of 2001, exempts, among other things, the sale of agricultural commodities from the financing and licensing restrictions of Title Nine of last year's agriculture appropriations bill, also known as the Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act. Last week, Senator Dorgan and I introduced similar corrective legislation. Title Nine of the fiscal year 2001 agriculture appropriations bill made significant progress toward ending the misguided policy of using unilateral food sanctions to isolate or punish so-called ``countries of concern''. Title Nine holds that ``The President shall terminate any unilateral agricultural sanction or unilateral medical sanction that is in effect as of the date of enactment of this Act.'' That is indeed progress, Mr. President. As I noted last week with my friend from North Dakota, however, Title Nine prohibits basic facilitators to trade--financing and export promotion. The Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act effectively thwarts U.S. agricultural trade with Cuba. It is that reality that prompts me to introduce and support as many legislative vehicles as I can toward repealing the prohibitions in last year's bill and opening the Cuban market to American agricultural commodities. There has been much talk about the importance of American tourist travel to Cuba--this is true and I have stated it repeatedly. The Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act's tourist travel ban stifles the most powerful influence on Cuban society: American culture and perspective, both economic and political. Consistent with the Dorgan-Roberts bill introduced last week, the codification of tourist travel restrictions is repealed under the Cuba Food & Medicine Access Act of 2001 as are restrictions on the sale of medicine and medical products. Further, the trade of both food and medicine is enhanced by nullifying a provision of the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992, which prohibits ships entering ports in Cuba from visiting U.S. ports for at least 180 days without a special license. Today, however, I want to place more emphasis on the agricultural trade issue. The U.S. cannot afford to rule out any market for our agricultural commodities. Now more than ever, as new markets develop and our competitors seize those opportunities, it makes no sense to preclude the use of export promotion programs nor outlaw private U.S. financing. It is nonsense to isolate our farmers in this fashion. Section 908 of the fiscal year 2001 agriculture appropriations bill reads ``no United States Government assistance, including United States foreign assistance, United States export assistance, and any United States credit or guarantees shall be available for exports to Cuba.'' Section 908 goes on to state, incredibly, that ``no United States person may provide payment or financing terms for sales of agricultural commodities or products to Cuba or any person in Cuba.'' It's quite clear, Mr. President, the intent of this provision is to keep the Cuban market cut off from America's farmers. This is unacceptable. If it's not to keep the Cuban market cut off, then what is the policy? What are our farmers supposed to do when faced with this kind of contradictory and politicized language: You are permitted to sell to Cuba but don't bother trying? We are either going to encourage and facilitate global agricultural trade or we are going to discourage and complicate global agricultural trade. You can't have it both ways. Why is this significant in regards to Cuba? Let us sample some recent statistics provided by the U.S.-Cuba Trade & Economic Council, based in New York City: Wheat exports from Canada to Cuba in 1999 and 2000-- 730,000 tons; corn exports from China to Cuba in 2000--26,101 tons; and rice exports from China to Cuba in 2000--225,510 tons. No, Cuba is not the largest market, Mr. President, but the point is, our farmers should be able to compete for that business. It's our obligation to at least permit such an opportunity.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise today, as many of my colleagues have done, in support of my friend and our friend, Senator John Ashcroft, to be Attorney General of the United States. It is always interesting, as the distinguished Senator from California has indicated, to look at people's views in a situation such as this. And I must say that while I respect the Senator's views and her comments, I guess what I will describe as allegations, I do have a different view. This does not add up to the John Ashcroft I know as a neighbor. We have heard the debate. It has been considerable. We have all heard the charge that Senator Ashcroft is somehow not fit to serve as Attorney General. But that really does not square with the John Ashcroft I know. We in Kansas have watched our neighbor and observed his record for a great number of years. We think we know this man. Again, I don't think the record really squares with the charges and the allegations that have been tossed about for the last several weeks. As Missouri attorney general, John Ashcroft strictly enforced laws that differed from his own beliefs. I repeat that. That seems to be the crucial issue here. He strictly enforced laws that actually differed from his own beliefs, including firearms--we have heard a lot of talk about firearms--whether prosecuting attorneys could actually carry concealed weapons; here is one on abortion and that dealt with the confidentiality of hospital records on numbers of abortions that were performed; whether a death certificate was legally required for fetuses under 20 weeks; church and state; the availability of funds for private and religious schools, and the distribution of religious materials in public schools; quite a few environmental regulations; and also in regard to affirmative action. If Senator Ashcroft could not honestly enforce the law, wouldn't somebody have documented such an instance by now in relation to these laws he did enforce that involved strong beliefs with which he did not agree? I don't think they have, despite the rhetoric. I will talk a little bit about experience. John Ashcroft, regardless of your view about his stance on the issues or his ideology or selected quotes, is the most experienced Attorney General nominee in American history. Boy, that is a strong statement, but consider the facts. Of the 67 persons who have served in that office since the founding of the Republic, only one, John Ashcroft, has served as State attorney general--that is two terms--and Governor of his State--two terms--and as a U.S. Senator with service on the Senate Judiciary Committee. As Missouri AG, John Ashcroft was elected the president of the National Association of Attorneys General. As Missouri Governor, he was elected chairman of the National Governors' Association. If John Ashcroft's execution of these earlier public trusts was as far ``out of the mainstream'' as his critics now claim, wouldn't his fellow State attorneys general or Governors, including Democrats, have noticed and said something? His colleagues universally admire his devotion to his faith. Mr. Byrd, the distinguished Senator from West Virginia, spoke to that earlier today and made some excellent comments. Does that not imply he is then a man of conscience, that he will do what he says he will do? John Ashcroft himself said: My primary personal belief is that the law is supreme; that I don't place myself above the law, and I shouldn't place myself above the law. So it would violate my beliefs to do it. He will enforce the law. Perhaps the most serious of the charges against the Senator, our former colleague, is that he is somehow--and I don't like to use this term, but it has been bandied about--a racist because of his opposition to Justice Ronnie White. I do not think, in knowing the man and in looking at the record very carefully, there is any evidence of racial bias in Senator Ashcroft's record. Among other initiatives--and this has been said before on the floor, and it deserves repeating--this is a man who signed Missouri's first hate crimes statute into law. He signed into law the bill establishing a Martin Luther King, Jr., holiday in Missouri. He appointed the first African American woman to the Missouri Court of Appeals. He has been a leader in opposition to racial profiling. In my personal view, there were good reasons that Senator Ashcroft opposed the White confirmation and that every Republican Senator then voted no. Justice White, during his tenure on the Missouri Supreme Court, was notable for his anti-death-penalty and procriminal bias, which led to strong bipartisan opposition from the law enforcement community to his lifetime appointment to the Federal bench. Let me point this out. More than 70 percent of all elected officials in Missouri, including sheriffs, are Democrats; and 77 of the 114 Missouri sheriffs, including many Democrats, were on record in unprecedented opposition to Justice White's confirmation. The Missouri Federation of Police Chiefs and the National Sheriffs Association were also against that confirmation. I voted no. I did not know at the time when I cast that vote of Justice White's African American status. I didn't know that. As a matter of fact, in talking with fellow Republicans, many of us did not know that. John Ashcroft never mentioned that. That wasn't the reason we opposed him. Senator Ashcroft's opponents accuse him of being out of the mainstream and in support of private ownership of firearms. They say his support of firearms as a guard against government tyranny is ``talk of a madman.'' I think we ought to look at the record. As State attorney general and Governor, John Ashcroft conscientiously enforced both State and Federal gun laws, even those with which he disagreed. That again is the crucial issue. His record does contrast sharply with the Clinton Justice Department's failure to enforce existing Federal gun laws, even while calling for new ones. The second amendment to the U.S. Constitution was adopted to preserve a traditional right of the people as a guard against government encroachment, and that point is beyond dispute. If John Ashcroft is ``a madman'' or ``out of the mainstream,'' so were James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Noah Webster, Abraham Lincoln, Hubert Humphrey, and other notable Americans who held that same view. Despite the harsh words being hurled in Washington about this nomination, many in our Nation's heartland, in Kansas and Nebraska, Oklahoma, Missouri, know, understand, have seen him up close and personal as neighbors. We know he is an outstanding public servant and will make an outstanding Attorney General. Listen to what the Atlanta Journal and Constitution has to say about this nomination: Ashcroft is certainly conservative, and he is certainly religious. But 88 percent of his fellow citizens report that religion is important or very important in their lives, a figure that has barely varied over the past 20 years. Seventy percent or more believe the nation would be better off if it were more religious, and 79 percent favor prayer or at least a moment of silence in the public schools. So who's out of the mainstream? Ashcroft strongly opposes abortion on moral grounds; 55 percent of the people say it is ``morally wrong most of the time.'' The nominee would like to see sharp restrictions on when an abortion would be legal; only 28 percent of Americans think it should be legal under any circumstances. He absolutely opposes partial-birth abortion; so do 66 percent of Americans. Who are the extremists on this issue? Actually, none of these attacks on Ashcroft's beliefs has much real meaning because he has already demonstrated, as Attorney General of Missouri, that he is perfectly capable of following the law as it is, rather than as he might wish it were. Again, that is the basic point I make. Maybe it is difficult for his opponents to believe that he could so carefully separate his personal views from his task as chief enforcer of the nation's laws because they have so much trouble doing that themselves. But we believe he can and will do so and that the American mainstream which was invoked so frequently at his hearings will be well served and satisfied with the job that he will do. I certainly agree that America will be well served with Senator Ashcroft's confirmation by the Senate. I intend to vote for him. I urge my colleagues to do the same. One other thing: John Ashcroft and I spent a little time together--3 days--up in the wilds of Alaska. We were up there at the invitation of Senator Ted Stevens. There is a fishing contest up there. The Presiding Officer is very skilled, by the way, in taking part in that whole fishing contest. The proceeds are used to improve the habitat on the Kenai River. We had a great deal to say to each other, both Senator Ashcroft and myself, when we were fishing in that kind of circumstance. We didn't talk about anything that involved racism, or Bob Jones University, or selected quotes, or whatever; we talked as individuals and as friends. I did not hear a bitter or prejudicial word. We talked about what things mean in life basically. We talked about family and of the Lord's creation. We talked as fellow men. We talked about the privilege to serve in the Senate. We told a lot of stories about human beings, we talked a lot about fishing, and we talked a lot about friendship. I think when we can spend time with a man in that kind of circumstance, we really get to know him. Personally, I just want to say I am having a lot of trouble figuring out whom the critics are talking about in regard to the John Ashcroft I know and respect. I think he will make a great Attorney General. And, quite frankly, I think at the end of the day when he reaches out in an act of friendship and trust across the aisle to many of his critics, we are going to be just fine. I yield the remainder of my time.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from North Dakota to introduce legislation to remove several trade limiting provisions from the FY 2001 Agriculture Appropriations Bill. Although the intent may have been otherwise, the overall effect was to tighten existing prohibitions on trade with and tourist travel to Cuba. Specifically, the purpose of the Dorgan-Roberts bill is to make changes to Title 9 of the FY 2001 Agriculture Appropriations Bill, repealing sections 908 & 910 and making a small change to section 906. Title 9, as you recall, is also known as the Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act. It made a number of important strides toward ending the misguided policy of using unilateral food and medicine sanctions as a foreign policy tool. Title 9, for example, terminates current unilateral agricultural and medical sanctions and requires congressional approval for any new unilateral sanctions that Presidents may consider in the future. That is the good news about last year's effort. The bad news is that sections 908 effectively cancels U.S. agricultural trade with Cuba as it prohibits any U.S.-based private financing or the application of any U.S. Government agricultural export promotion program. The de facto effect of this provision is to keep the Cuban market cut-off from America's farmers. This is unacceptable to me. Also, section 906 permits the issuance of only one-year licenses for contracts to sell agricultural commodities and medicine to Cuba but places no such restriction on Syria and North Korea. What's the policy? What kind of confused message is this? We are either going to permit the sale of food and medicine to all nations despite the presence of some on the State Department terrorist list or we are not going to encourage the sale of food and medicine to all Nations. Let us be consistent in these matters. Finally, we seek to rescind section 910 which codified prohibitions against tourist travel or tourist visits to Cuba. This travel ban stifles the most powerful influence on Cuban society: American culture and perspective, both economic and political. When Americans travel, they transmit our nation's ideas and values. That is one reason why travel was permitted to the Soviet Union and is permitted to the People's Republic of China. A tourist travel ban is simply counterproductive. Trade with Cuba is a very sensitive issue with reasonable, well- intentioned people on both sides. But it is an issue which must be addressed as globalization and the aggressive posture of America's trade competitors increases. We can no longer sacrifice the American farmer on the altar of the cold war paradigm.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague from North Dakota to introduce legislation to remove several trade limiting provisions from the FY 2001 Agriculture Appropriations Bill. Although the intent may have been otherwise, the overall effect was to tighten existing prohibitions on trade with and tourist travel to Cuba. Specifically, the purpose of the Dorgan-Roberts bill is to make changes to Title 9 of the FY 2001 Agriculture Appropriations Bill, repealing sections 908 & 910 and making a small change to section 906. Title 9, as you recall, is also known as the Trade Sanctions Reform & Export Enhancement Act. It made a number of important strides toward ending the misguided policy of using unilateral food and medicine sanctions as a foreign policy tool. Title 9, for example, terminates current unilateral agricultural and medical sanctions and requires congressional approval for any new unilateral sanctions that Presidents may consider in the future. That is the good news about last year's effort. The bad news is that sections 908 effectively cancels U.S. agricultural trade with Cuba as it prohibits any U.S.-based private financing or the application of any U.S. Government agricultural export promotion program. The de facto effect of this provision is to keep the Cuban market cut-off from America's farmers. This is unacceptable to me. Also, section 906 permits the issuance of only one-year licenses for contracts to sell agricultural commodities and medicine to Cuba but places no such restriction on Syria and North Korea. What's the policy? What kind of confused message is this? We are either going to permit the sale of food and medicine to all nations despite the presence of some on the State Department terrorist list or we are not going to encourage the sale of food and medicine to all Nations. Let us be consistent in these matters. Finally, we seek to rescind section 910 which codified prohibitions against tourist travel or tourist visits to Cuba. This travel ban stifles the most powerful influence on Cuban society: American culture and perspective, both economic and political. When Americans travel, they transmit our nation's ideas and values. That is one reason why travel was permitted to the Soviet Union and is permitted to the People's Republic of China. A tourist travel ban is simply counterproductive. Trade with Cuba is a very sensitive issue with reasonable, well- intentioned people on both sides. But it is an issue which must be addressed as globalization and the aggressive posture of America's trade competitors increases. We can no longer sacrifice the American farmer on the altar of the cold war paradigm.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I send a resolution to the desk concerning the appointment of a new President pro tempore of the Senate.

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

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. For the information of all Senators, the Senate will convene at 10 a.m. on Monday. There will be a period of morning business until 3 p.m. for statements and for bill introductions. As a reminder, Monday is the first day for bill introductions. There will be no rollcall votes on Monday. However, Senators can expect votes throughout the remainder of the week, if necessary. This is in regard to the confirmation of the President's nominees for his Cabinet.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that the following nominations be placed directly on the Executive Calendar, that of Colin L. Powell, Paul H. O'Neill, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Donald L. Evans, Spencer Abraham, Rod Paige, Anthony Principi, Ann Veneman, and Mitch Daniels.

Mr. ROBERTS

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

Mr. ROBERTS. I now send a second resolution to the desk also concerning the President pro tempore and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the nominations of Donald H. Rumsfeld to be Secretary of Defense, Colin L. Powell to be Secretary of State, Paul H. O'Neill to be Secretary of the Treasury, Ann Veneman to be Secretary of Agriculture, Donald L. Evans to be Secretary of Commerce, Rod Paige to be Secretary of Education, and Spencer Abraham to be Secretary of Energy.

Mr. ROBERTS. I further ask unanimous consent, Mr. President, that the nominations be considered en bloc and disposed of en bloc, that each nomination be considered separately in the Record, and following the confirmations the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, that the President be immediately notified that the Senate has given its consent to these nominations, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until the hour of 10 a.m. on Monday, January 22. I further ask unanimous consent that on Monday, immediately following the prayer, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate then be in a period of morning business until 3 p.m., with Senators speaking for up to 10 minutes each, and that the time be equally divided in the usual form with the following exceptions: Senator Lott, or his designee, the first 30 minutes; Senator Daschle, or his designee, the second 30 minutes.

Mr. ROBERTS

Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the distinguished Presiding Officer. Madam President, the motto from my home State of Kansas is ``Ad astra per aspera.'' Translated it means ``to the stars through difficulty.'' If you take a look at our pioneer past and the history of the problems we experienced in the West, our heritage and progress we have made as a free State, the motto is very appropriate. Perhaps ``to the stars through difficulty'' should be the appropriate motto to describe the challenge we face in the Senate as we begin what Senator Byrd has described as a very historic and a very unprecedented session. With a 50/50 membership split, we have to proceed in a bipartisan fashion or we are not going to proceed. I thank and pay credit to the distinguished majority leader, Senator Daschle, and our distinguished Republican leader, Senator Lott, for persevering. Senator Byrd said it was excruciating, and it probably has been. There has been a lot of second-guessing, a lot of concern, a lot of frustration, a lot of worries. I have had some of those, but they have basically worked out what we hope will be a blueprint of Senate rules and procedures that will allow us to work together and avoid gridlock and get something done. Our respective leaders have said, and will speak for themselves, that this will not be easy. Senator Domenici and Senator Gramm have expressed those concerns. I suppose some are wondering why a worker bee or a rank-and-file person in the Senate should be here as opposed to the leadership and the distinguished chairmen of the committees, but I have a little history in regard to this body and the other body. I served 14 years as a staffer, 16 years in the House of Representatives, and now 4 in the Senate. That is a long time. I am the only member of the Kansas delegation who has ever served in the minority. That is rather astounding to me. I can remember when how legislation was considered and when it was considered in the House was a foregone conclusion. There were an awful lot of Charlie Stenholm-Pat Roberts amendments. All of a sudden, they became Roberts-Stenholm amendments. I can remember how that worked. In the Agriculture Committee, we were not that partisan. I have a great deal of reverence for this body. I serve on the Agriculture Committee. We have to get a farm bill done, tax policy changes, sanctions reform; we have to have an export policy that works. Our farmers and ranchers are still hurting. Senator Harkin and Senator Lugar will devise ways to get that done. We cannot hold that up. The distinguished chairman-to-be after January 20 and the distinguished Senator from Michigan have quality of life issues with our armed services people; we have our vital national interests to prioritize; we have some recruiting problems, some retention problems. Quite frankly, our military is stressed, strained, and hollow. We must address this. It is our national security. We cannot hold this up. We have to move ahead. I also serve on the Intelligence Committee. In that respect, the chairman-to-be, Senator Shelby, and the current chairman have to detect and deter and get ready for consequence management with all sorts of problems in regard to terrorism and homeland defense. We are talking about the individual freedoms and the security of the American people. We cannot hold that up by a filibuster or any kind of gridlock. In regard to what we have to do, let us follow the example of President-elect Bush. He has said: Let us unite. I am a uniter; I am not a divider. We can do that. We can follow his example. We have reached out with a hand of friendship and trust, as described by Senator Stevens. We ought to seize that opportunity. I know there are some who say we are going to get a slap in the face in return. It will not be a slap in the face in return to anybody in this body or from a partisan standpoint; it will be a slap in the face to the American people, and they will understand that.

Mr. ROBERTS. I talked to a respected and veteran newspaper editorialist of the Washington Post, Bob Kaiser, just a couple days ago. He said: Pat, you have been around here quite a while. Is this possible? 50/50, will it work in the Senate? Can you avoid the partisan bickering and all that that encompasses? I said: I don't know, Bob, but we've got a shot. We have an opportunity. Borne out of necessity, we must do this. Senator Lott and Senator Daschle, and our leadership team, thank you for arranging this possibility. It is now up to us. We have the responsibility, and, yes, both of us now have the authority. Let's see if we can get it done. I yield the floor.