Arlen Specter

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, by way of a very brief reply, I think that Davis-Bacon is American. It has been American since 1931, almost as long as I have been in America; right about the same time. It has worked very well. There is merit to what the Senator from New Hampshire has argued in some respects. But to say that it is not American, this has been the Federal law for a very long time. How much time remains, Mr. President?

Mr. SPECTER. I yield the remainder of time to the Senator from Massachusetts.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I move to table the amendment, and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I believe we are near the conclusion of this bill. We are about to move to the Wellstone amendment. We are very close to completion of this bill. We are now going to move to the Wellstone amendment, and there are no further amendments on the Republican side.

Mr. SPECTER. We are very close, Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent that there be 1 hour of debate equally divided in relation to the Wellstone amendment on mental health prior to a motion to table.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I yield so the Senator may offer his amendment, and then I will repropound the unanimous consent request. Amendment No. 1880 (Purpose: to increase funding for the mental health services block grant)

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be 1 hour of debate equally divided in relation to the Wellstone amendment on mental health prior to a motion to table.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, we have been reviewing this amendment for additional funding for the mental health block grant. It is obviously a good program, beyond any question. The key issue is how far we can stretch in this bill. I have talked to the Senator from Minnesota and told him that after consulting with some of my colleagues on this side of the aisle, we would be prepared to accept it on a voice vote.

Mr. SPECTER. I yield back my time.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Pardon me. I withdraw that because the Senators from New Mexico were here sequenced ahead of Senator Graham.

Mr. SPECTER. Florida for 15 minutes.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we turn to the Senator from----

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the time on this bill be directed to the amendment of the Senators from New Mexico, then 15 minutes to Senator Graham of Florida, then 10 minutes to be equally divided between the managers of the bill, and then go to final passage.

Mr. SPECTER. I incorporate that in the unanimous consent request.

Mr. SPECTER. Two minutes for Senator Kennedy.

Mr. SPECTER. He is speaking on the bill.

Mr. SPECTER. Unless Senator Leahy comes and claims the time which Senator Reid has asked for.

Mr. SPECTER. We added 5 more minutes for Senator Harkin: the managers, 15 minutes; Senator Harkin, 10; myself, 5.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, exclude Senator Kennedy from the unanimous consent request.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask that we turn to the Senators from New Mexico.

Mr. SPECTER. The managers have taken a look at this amendment and are prepared to accept it. It is a good amendment. There is one concern, and that is a jurisdictional concern with respect to the Finance Committee. We have attempted to contact the chairman of the Finance Committee to see if there was any substantial reason we should not accept it. If it went to a vote, it would clearly be adopted. It merely asks for a report for a very good purpose. Therefore, the amendment is accepted.

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

Mr. SPECTER. I thank my distinguished colleague. I am very sympathetic to the purpose of the sense-of-the-Senate amendment. He is correct; there would be objection, and I think it would not be adopted. I thank him for withdrawing the amendment.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I now submit the managers' package which has been cleared on both sides.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee for that statement. I have just a word or two to say about the same subject. The White House made a comment--Mr. Lockhart--that I was one of three Republican Senators who voted for Judge White in committee and then voted against him on the floor. It is inaccurate to say I voted for him in committee because I did not. What happened was, the Judiciary Committee had a very abbreviated session off the floor and I went there to see if there was a quorum. When there was a quorum, Justice White was voted out of committee on a voice vote, but I was not present for that voice vote. I was especially sensitive to Judge White because Judge Massiah- Jackson came before the Senate last year and withdrew her nomination in the face of very considerable opposition by the State District Attorneys Association. So I took a close look at the letters, and even had a brief conversation with the ranking Democrat before casting my vote, which I did at the tail end of the vote on Justice White. But contrary to what Mr. Lockhart of the White House said, and contrary to what has appeared in a number of press accounts, I did not vote for Justice White in the committee.