Arlen Specter

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Dole, for the information of all Senators, the Senate will begin the health insurance reform bill tomorrow morning. Amendments are expected to be offered to that legislation. Therefore, Senators can expect rollcall votes throughout the day, and a late session is anticipated. The Senate may be asked to turn to any other legislative items that can be cleared for action.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I seek recognition to comment on a number of subjects. The Senate has been in session for the last 2 days continuously on the terrorism bill, and there are a number of subjects that I have sought recognition to speak about at this time. As we say, the Senate is on ``automatic pilot,'' so when I conclude my remarks, the Senate will be in adjournment. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following remarks appear under a caption of ``Foreign Travel, April 2 through April 5, 1996.''

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask that the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order following the conclusion of the remarks that I shall make as in morning business.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. I thank my colleague from Texas for those comments. We try on the floor to respect those who have arrived earlier. I had not known that the distinguished Senator from Texas had been awaiting recognition. I walked in; he was not on the floor. But I learned a little by listening to Senator Gramm, which I do when I listen to Senator Gramm. I have had occasion to listen to Senator Gramm a great deal over the past year and have learned from the Senator over the course of the last year in other activities I have undertaken.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. I yield the floor.

Mr. SPECTER. I have sought recognition, Mr. President, to express my chagrin and disappointment that we are apparently not going to have an omnibus appropriations bill, but later today are going to proceed with another continuing resolution. Perhaps it is appropriate on April 1, on April Fool's Day, that Washington, DC, again looks like a collective group of April fools unable to pass a budget, and on April Fool's Day unable to finish the business of the preceding year, 1995. Within the past hour I have come from the conference of the House and Senate where very strenuous efforts have been made for the past several days to find a compromise on appropriations. I have the honor to chair the Senate Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services. Perhaps I use the wrong word when I say it is an ``honor.'' It has been really an embarrassment that we have not been able to bring a bill, the legislation, to fruition for funding which should have been in place by last October 1. But that bill has been tied up for a variety of reasons, with equal blame apportioned on both sides of the aisle, while we have been in gridlock on a number of matters. For many, many weeks I have been pressing very hard to try to get the matter resolved, have been working with Chief of Staff Leon Panetta to find offsets, have scheduled a series of hearings with the Secretaries of the three Departments--Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education--and we finally brought the bill to the Senate floor and finally got it passed by a very substantial number, 79 to 21. The key part of that bill was a bipartisan amendment worked out by the distinguished Senator from Iowa, Senator Harkin, and myself, Senator Harkin being the ranking member of the committee. We passed that amendment 84 to 16. During about 20 hours of conferencing, Mr. President, I think we had been able to finally thread the needle to find a bill which would probably have been signed by the President and which was acceptable to the House of Representatives. That is pretty hard to do in Washington, DC, today. There is considerably more flexibility in the U.S. Senate in trying to arrive at accommodation. We passed the bill which had the amendment which Senator Harkin and I had constructed and fashioned, which added $2.7 billion to some very important functions, to education, worker safety, and to health and human services. Notwithstanding that addition, the President had sent word that he wanted some $484 million more. Well, we were at the break point with the bill which we conferenced with the House of Representatives when we had called for $2.7 billion more in spending. Let me point out that that $2.7 billion was endorsed by both leaders, Senator Dole and Senator Daschle, 37 out of the 53 Republicans voted for the amendment, 37 Republicans voted for it and 16 voted against it, more than two-thirds of our Republican body voted for it, which is a very, very strong showing, given the constituency of our Senate caucus, and the amendment received all of the 47 Democratic votes. So, when we went to conference with this bill I thought, Senator Harkin thought, Senator Hatfield thought, that we were within range to have it signed by the President. We were not sure, but we thought we were within that range. We also constructed the bill so that it would be agreed to by our House colleagues. We were not sure about that either. It was very, very tough on negotiations. Finally, the House Labor, Health and Human Services conferees approved the bill by a vote of 6 to 5. You cannot get any closer than 6 to 5. But what we were veritably doing is running between the raindrops in a hurricane to find something which would satisfy our House colleagues and something which might be signed by the President. Regrettably, that is all for naught or mostly all for naught--mostly for naught or probably for naught--because when we do not get the bill and have a 3-week hiatus, it all unravels. Senator Baker was the majority leader when I first came to this body. I learned a great deal from Senator Baker. One of his famous statements--we were here at 11:30 one night. We were on the finance bill. There were 63 amendments pending. Senator Baker said, ``We're going to proceed and finish this bill because amendments, like mushrooms, grow overnight.'' We stayed through until 6:30 in the morning. We had some accepted. We had half a dozen votes. Many dropped by the wayside. We finished the bill. The dynamism in the U.S. Senate and the House is, if you do not push to get it through, it all unravels. We were on the verge of getting it through. I compliment our distinguished colleague, Senator Hatfield, for his prodigious work in shepherding this matter through and would note his consternation and amazement when he heard last night that we were going to have a continuing resolution. That was not known by the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, who was chairing the conference. I think it is very regrettable because, if we were going to have the time to present this bill on the floor today, or perhaps tomorrow--it would not be unheard of or out of line for us to work on a Saturday, even if it would mean a day less of the recess. That has happened before. These matters just do not coalesce until the very last minute. If there is more time for argument, more time for discussion, and more time for disagreement, when we finally work it out, it is an accommodation and a compromise. Nobody is really happy, and if you have more time to argue it some more, you expected to be in session last night until past midnight and then again today. With that pressure on, we were on the verge of having an omnibus appropriations bill, which I think would have concluded the matter. It is with considerable chagrin and considerable disappointment, speaking for myself, that we are not finishing. I think it is with considerable chagrin and considerable disappointment that the American people are watching the process and seeing April 1 come and seeing a bunch of ``April fools'' in Washington, DC, at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, unable to get the matter done. There is a responsibility in both Houses, a bicameral responsibility, and a responsibility on both sides of the aisle--Republicans and Democrats are equally at fault--and responsibility at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, because there is no easy compromise and no meeting of the minds without an elaborate, inordinate thrashing process where the White House always wants more and some here always want less. We are on the verge of getting it done. I think it is very regrettable we did not conclude it. Mr. President, when we added the $2.7 billion included in the Specter-Harkin amendment, we were able to add to some very, very important programs on education--that is a priority, second to none-- and important matters on worker safety, important matters on Health and Human Services. I know my distinguished colleague from Rhode Island is on the floor waiting to speak, and I will not go through the detail which I would have. Sometimes on Friday afternoon at 1:30 there is nobody seeking recognition on the floor. Instead, I will have printed in the Record this chart which shows a comparison, a transition, as to where the appropriations process had been, how we made the additions, how we came to the accommodations and compromises, and finish within $20 million, which is a small fraction of the $2.7 billion, we came in $20 million under the $2.7 billion, and actually only $14 million, because a $6 million addition was added by Congresswoman Pelosi on an education program, which I thought was fine. So we did the job. Regrettably, it is not altogether finished. Hopefully, a good part of this work will last, and we will be able to build on this when we come back, to finish this omnibus appropriations bill. There are a few outstanding matters on language and a few other outstanding issues, but I think they would have been resolved fairly quickly had the pressure been maintained to finish this, without the talk of a continuing resolution. I ask unanimous consent that this chart be printed at the conclusion of my remarks.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed for up to 5 minutes as if in morning business.

Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Chair. I thank my distinguished colleague from North Carolina.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, this is in line with efforts which are now being made by the Appropriations Subcommittee which I chair, Labor, Health, Human Services and Education, to allocate more funding for Title XX on abstinence. This is a funding issue which I have been active in at the specific request of our colleague, Senator Jeremiah Denton, who was a major spokesman for this issue prior to his departure from the Senate back in 1987. Mr. President, it is my intention to introduce legislation to increase funding and authorization on the abstinence issue and, also, legislation to promote adoption with tax breaks. My staff and I are currently in the process of securing cosponsors for that legislation, which I anticipate introducing sometime in the latter portion of April. Mr. President, at this point, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the proclamation be printed in the Record together with the list of the speakers who spoke at the Teen Pregnancy Prevention Week press conference back on March 15, 1996, together with a copy of the ``Dear Colleague'' letter which I am circulating with the request that any of my colleagues who wish to support this legislation let me know so they may be added as cosponsors.

Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to comment about the establishment of Teen Pregnancy Prevention Week in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from March 18 to March 24, and about a meeting of a number of people at Central High School in Philadelphia on Friday, March 15, at 3 p.m. where a group of educators, ministers, students, and I spoke briefly about this subject. There is enormous controversy on the subject of pro-choice, pro-life, but there is a consensus that there ought to be the maximum effort made toward prevention of teen pregnancy and that, to the extent possible, information should be distributed and there ought to be positive peer pressure on teens on the subject of abstinence. The birth rate among teenagers remains at a surprisingly and alarmingly high level compared to those of nearly all other developed countries. In Pennsylvania, the pregnancy rate is 58.3 per 1,000 females aged 15 to 25. A proclamation was adopted which I ask unanimous consent to be printed at the conclusion of these remarks on Teen Pregnancy Prevention Week.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, after extensive deliberation, on a very close call, I have decided to vote against the conference report on product liability legislation. This is a close question for me because the conference report corrects my concern on punitive damages and there is a need to make American business more competitive in world markets to provide economic expansion and job opportunities. In the final analysis, my judgment is that the disadvantages of the bill outweigh the advantages. For example, the 15-year statute of repose would deny recovery to injured parties from products intended for and used long after 15 years. The changes in the law involving workmen's compensation make it more difficult for plaintiffs to recover where a coworker or the employer is at fault. That provision also limits the employer's traditional subrogation rights leading to the opposition of homebuilders, workmen's compensation insurance carriers and other business interests because workmen's compensation costs will escalate. The conference report further limits the manufacturers' liability in cases where injuries result from a defective product where alcohol has been used. A defective seat belt is supposed to protect the car's driver regardless of his/her condition. This vote against the conference report is consistent with my vote yesterday for cloture. As I said in my statement on yesterday's vote, I believe the Senate's final determination on product liability legislation should be decided by majority vote rather than the super majority of 60 required for cloture. A decision on whether to support cloture depends upon a variety of factors such as whether there should be more debate to fully air the issue or whether a constitutional issue or some other fundamental issue is involved which warrants a super majority of 60. On this bill on the merits, I believe it should be decided by the traditional majority vote because it is such a close question without an underlying constitutional issue or some other fundamental matter. On the merits of the bill, in my judgment the disadvantages outweigh the advantages.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I am voting for cloture on the conference report on product liability legislation because I believe, on balance, that the issue should be decided by a majority vote of the Senate. In deciding to support cloture, I am significantly influenced by the fact that the conference report corrects my principal concern: punitive damages on egregious cases. A decision on whether to support cloture depends upon a variety of factors such as whether there should be more debate to fully air the issues or whether a constitutional issue or some other fundamental matter is involved which warrants a super-majority of 60. In the past, I have voted for cloture on product liability legislation in circumstance where I thought the matter should reach the Senate floor for a majority vote. On this state of the record on this bill, I think there should be a majority determination, so I am voting in favor of cloture.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Labor Committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 1787, and, further, that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be deemed read a third time, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be placed at the appropriate place in the Record. Again, I make a disclaimer, Mr. President, that I am making this statement at the request of the clerk in the absence of leadership where more detailed knowledge is present as to the specifics involved.

Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Chair. In the absence of any other Senator on the floor, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SPECTER

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

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 213, H.R. 1266.

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be deemed read a third time, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the bill be placed at the appropriate place in the Record.

Mr. SPECTER

Mr. SPECTER. That is correct.

Mr. SPECTER. I thank my distinguished colleague from Louisiana for his comments, and for bringing this component of telemedicine research to the subcommittee's attention. The subcommittee adjusted the funding levels for the Office of Rural Health Policy because it felt that programs, such as telemedicine, offer promise for improving services to rural communities in the future. There is a need to evaluate how telemedicine projects currently underway or under consideration fit into the overall scheme of health care delivery in the areas being served. Therefore, I think it would be consistent for the Health Resources and Services Administration to consider previously approved projects when it obligates Rural Health funding.

Mr. SPECTER. That is further correct. This is a project that warrants full and fair consideration by HCFA, which should adhere to the intentions of the Senate with regard to this important piece of report language.

Mr. SPECTER. Senator Hatfield, the answer is that these funds are intended for regional priorities only and only when the priority is determined by a laboratory's board, and is a priority within the general problem areas established in the law. None of these funds are to be used for any other purpose. This is what Congress intended when we reauthorized these laboratories. A key role of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement is to guarantee that this expectation is met, not only with the additional funds we provide this year, but for all the funds for the regional educational laboratories. National Test Facility

Mr. SPECTER. I appreciate my colleagues raising this issue. I know that language similar to the fiscal year 1996 House report language was included in the Senate report last year, and certainly, the Senate committee continues to agree.

Mr. SPECTER. I am familiar with the issue and would be glad to discuss it with my friends from South Carolina and Arizona.