Paul Wellstone

Mr. WELLSTONE

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, that is fine. I thank the Chair.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair. I ask unanimous consent that my colleagues at a minimum be allowed to speak in testimonial to Senator Strom Thurmond and about Senator Strom Thurmond as long as my resumption on the floor not be counted as a second speech.

Mr. WELLSTONE. That is correct.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I will not object.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I construe this as a question from my colleague from Massachusetts. And I have said before that I would be willing to enable the Senate to have the Senator speak and topics but that I want to do it within this time limit, and if the Senator from Missouri wants to speak as well but only with the unanimous-consent agreement that my resumption on the floor not be counted as a second speech. Is the Senator asking a question?

Mr. WELLSTONE. Is this a question?

Mr. WELLSTONE. I am pleased to yield for a question, and, Mr. President, let me say before yielding, I do not understand the objection, but I would like to let colleagues speak about Senator Thurmond and cover some other matters, and I am pleased to do that as long, again, as I get unanimous consent resumption on the floor not being counted as a second speech. My colleague has objected, I guess, for now.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I say to my colleague from North Dakota, that would be fine. I would like to finish reading this article and then accommodate colleagues, but I also ask unanimous consent I maintain my floor privilege. If I could finish this, let me go on with this article. On Polk Street, a block off Lincoln Drive, Paul Dilling stands in the front yard of his ruined house, which was submerged to the rafters. He stands by his water mark: A U.S. flag, muddy and torn, which he salvaged from the muck and stuck on a stick. But it has been five weeks of misery for Dilling. That is really the point I am trying to make. It has been 5 weeks of misery. People have been through misery. They have been devastated, and now they wait for this Congress to pass the disaster relief bill. That is why I am saying this should be the first item of business for us. It is interesting, there is a St. Paul Pioneer Press editorial of May 23, with a headline ``Congress Can't Resist Political Gamesmanship.'' Congress has breezed out of town, leaving Washington for a long holiday recess. Despite evidence to the contrary, congressional bigwigs figured satisfying their political egos was more important than expediting flood relief legislation that would aid, among other backwaters, Minnesota and the Dakotas. I know that my colleagues may want to have some floor time now, so I will be very brief. But let me just for a moment develop this point, and then I will keep my floor privileges. This is from the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Now, I have not always agreed with the editorial positions of the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Sometimes I have, sometimes I have not. That is beside the point. Sometimes the St. Paul Pioneer Press will take editorial positions closer to the positions of the distinguished Chair or my colleague from Missouri. It is an interesting paper, and they, like any good editorial page, have their own integrity and they say what they think is right. But I just want to make it clear that this is not some sort of editorial written by Democrats trying to figure out a way to criticize Republicans. Congress Can't Resist Political Gamesmanship Congress has breezed out of town, leaving Washington for a long holiday recess [right before Memorial Day recess]. Despite evidence to the contrary, congressional bigwigs figured satisfying their political egos was more important than expediting flood relief legislation that would aid, among other backwaters, Minnesota and the Dakotas. We have had enough of this political gamesmanship. We have had enough of it. We have people in our States that are hurting. We have children that are homeless. We have children that have had to live through this devastation. We have families under duress. We have families under pressure. And the people in Minnesota and the people in the Dakotas and the people in some of the other States have every right to believe that the goodness of the Congress would come through and we would provide them with the assistance they so badly need to rebuild their lives. You have people in the House of Representatives that go on vacation as opposed to providing this assistance. That is why I am on the floor today. That is why I am staying on the floor. And now I hear that this week we may not pass this. This is outrageous. One more time: If you want to have a debate about a continuing resolution budget, debate it. If you want to have a debate about parks and environmental legislation, debate it. But do not put it on a disaster relief bill. Do not hold good people that deserve our support hostage to your grand political strategy. Today, it is an inconvenience. We have a bill on the floor. It is a slight inconvenience. People wanted to have a discussion on amendments, and we are not doing that today. It is not a major inconvenience. But you know what? I actually think, and I do not mean this in an arrogant way, I think I am doing some of the leadership in the House of Representatives a favor, because if, in my own small way, I can put any pressure on them to do the right thing, they will be better off, because they look terrible. They look terrible. You could do a poll in Missouri, Massachusetts, Minnesota, anywhere in the country, and 99.9 percent of the people in the country would say this is outrageous. Can't you people at least provide help to people when they need it? That is what this is all about. I say to the St. Paul Pioneer Press, I am actually being a pretty good politician. I say first to the Star Tribune, both newspapers, this is a very good article, and there are many others. This editorial of the St. Paul Pioneer Press is right on the mark. Now, this hurts. ``Despite evidence to the contrary, congressional bigwigs * * * ''--I hate to hear that. But you know something, it is too easy to do. Mr. President, I do not like it when my colleagues are called congressional bigwigs. I tell you something, you are bringing it on yourselves. I actually do not know if I should use the word ``leadership'' in the House, because I think it is hard to say there is any leadership when you cannot move forward on a disaster relief bill. But I tell you something, here is a headline in the Star Tribune, ``Flood Relief''--and I say to my colleague from Massachusetts, I will finish up in a moment--``Flood relief, a political football, takes another bounce in D.C.'' Congressional skirmishing delayed consideration of flood relief legislation Thursday, and the $5.5 billion aid package will not be approved until Congress returns from the Memorial Day recess early next month. That is from Washington bureau chief Tom Hamburger, Star Tribune. Well, Mr. President, I have plenty of articles to read from. I have applications from some of our cities that have been devastated. I will have time to continue to talk about what has happened, but I will tell you that if my being on the floor of the Senate at least for a while, at least for the rest of the afternoon, and then, as I say, all week and the weeks to come, every time I can come out here, any leverage I have to come out here and talk about this, I will keep pressing and pressing and pressing and pressing and pressing. My colleagues are going to hear about people in East Grand Forks and Ada and so many towns, they will get tired of hearing about it. But you know what? I do not really care, because this is just outrageous. I have some very good people I work with that are on the floor now, representing a broad spectrum of political opinion, Senator Kennedy and Senator Ashcroft, but I tell you something, this is not a great moment for the Congress, and I think it is outrageous what the House of Representatives did. This disaster relief bill has to get passed, and it has to get passed this week. The only way I know to try and do everything I can, there is no guarantee, is just to raise a lot of heck--I did say heck--on the floor of the U.S. Senate. I will continue to do so. Now, I have other points I want to make, but I see the Senator from Massachusetts. I wonder if the Senator may have an inquiry he would like to make. I still have the floor, Mr. President, and I want to make it clear that if I do take any question from the Senator or give the Senator any time, I ask unanimous consent if the Senator wants to speak, either Senator, I ask unanimous consent my resumption on the floor not be counted as a second speech.

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

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, let me, before entertaining a question from my colleague, a request from my colleague, let me read from an article. And I see my colleague from North Dakota, Senator Dorgan, is on the floor. Let me read from an article, ``Stains of Pain,'' dealing with Grand Forks, ND. This was May 25, 1997. It has been five weeks since the river swamped these towns. The river is back in its banks now, officially below flood stage, far from homes and businesses and children at play. But the water marks remain everywhere. Mr. President, I was just thinking, I know some of my colleagues want to speak, but I also see my colleague here from North Dakota. I wonder whether it would be possible, Mr. President, I want to read this article, and then if there are some requests about speaking, perhaps we could do that, although I then want to make it clear that on unanimous consent, my resumption on the floor not be counted as a second speech. Now, I want to make it clear to my colleagues if they put in that request, that would be part of my unanimous-consent agreement. I also make a request, I know my colleagues want to speak about some other things, but, for certain, if colleagues want to speak about Senator Strom Thurmond, I do not want to interrupt that in any way, shape or form. If colleagues want to speak about Senator Thurmond, fine. Otherwise, I know there are things a few people want to cover. What we are doing here today is saying we want to focus on this and this will be it. This is the issue. This is the action that should be taken.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank my colleague. Whatever time he needs. I just wanted to know how much time. Mr. ROBERTS addressed the Chair.

Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair. I wonder if I could ask my colleague how long he might want to speak. It is fine for me however long he wants.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I do not think this piece of legislation takes first priority. I do not think some of the amendments that are on the floor right now take first priority. I am not speaking about those amendments. There is not anybody who is going to speak on those amendments for a while. I do not think those amendments should take priority. I do not think the budget, if we get to the budget sometime this week, should take priority. I do not think there is anything we could do this week that would be as important as providing people, families, who have been through just total devastation with a helping hand. Can't we do that? Can't we just provide people a helping hand? Can't we give people some confidence they are going to have some assistance so they can move back into their homes? Is that too much to ask? Can't we give some small businesses some confidence that there is going to be some access to capital and some assistance so they can start up their businesses again? I want to tell you something. Maybe some people think some of this is funny, but I want to tell you something. A whole lot of these people, these homeowners and these business people, are leaving. They are not going to be able to stay in these communities, I say to the majority leader, who has helped us, who has done a good job, and I thank him. These people are not going to be able to move back into their communities. A lot of these people are going to leave. That is what we are now here on. So, Mr. President, I think it is appropriate that I take the floor and speak about this because I am hearing this from people in my State. And I know other Senators are hearing this as well. Mr. President, this is a letter from the mayor of East Grant Forks, Lynn Stauss, again, who has just done a yeoman job, to members of the task force, the Minnesota Recovery Task Force: Please accept the following information as our preliminary application to the Minnesota Recovery Disaster Task Force. We hope the data we have included will assist you in assessing the level of damage in East Grand Forks and allow us to receive early consideration in the coming discussion on recovery activity in our State. We consider our position to be worthy of a serious share of the Federal and State funding that will come to Minnesota. I know that you have been apprised of our damage situation throughout the Nation and statewide media over the hours of this disaster. Our city staff would welcome the opportunity to answer your questions at any time. Thank you for your time and consideration. Lynn Stauss, Mayor, East Grand Forks. Now, Mr. President, what I have here--and it will take me a little bit of time to read this application--is the application from the mayor. I want to emphasize one more time--and, Mr. President, I would like to apologize to some citizens who have come here today who are here during our proceeding. Normally we have debate on amendments, and when I start reading from some of this I fear that for some people here that will not be--without knowing the ins and outs of all of this, it may not be relevant, but I want to just make it clear one more time I once in a while come to the floor of the Senate and do this, but not very often, and I think those of us, whether we are Democrats or Republicans, don't come to the floor of the Senate and do this and hold the floor unless we really feel strongly about something. But, Mr. President, I do feel strongly about this. Time is not neutral. Time rushes on. There are too many people who are hurting. They have asked for assistance, and we have got people who are playing games here. There is no other order of business that should come before our passing this emergency supplemental bill that provides disaster relief to people who have been through hell. They deserve our help, and they should not have to wait. They should not have to be out there twisting in the wind. They should not have to wonder what in the world is the matter with us. This bill ought to pass this week. This bill ought to pass today. I would be proud or pleased to leave the floor right now if I only thought something was going to be done. Mr. President, let me go on and read from this application. This is just from East Grand Forks, really not talking about--I was in Ada, MN. In Ada, MN, it was just devastating. The school was completely flooded, much of it destroyed. They are going to be able to renovate the school, but can you imagine this? Here you have the school completely destroyed. It is going to be rebuilt, but somehow those students and the teachers and the support staff and the superintendent and the parents and the neighbors all banded together, and other schools will take in those kids and those kids are now finishing school and they are going to graduate. That is inspiring. I will tell you something, Mr. President. What is not inspiring is this Congress. What is not inspiring is the House of Representatives. What is not inspiring is the Representatives or Senators who put extraneous measures onto this piece of legislation and are not willing to get the assistance to people who need it now. That is not inspiring. We do not set a very good model for young people when we cannot stop playing games and just provide assistance to people who need that assistance. In Ada, as well, their hospital was just, again, devastated. They had to, in the dark of night, I think it was late at night, 10, 11, 12 o'clock, they had to take elderly people out of the nursing home, had to evacuate them. It was just unbelievable what people went through. Can you imagine a hospital destroyed, the community center destroyed, the school destroyed? And can you imagine what it would be like to, first of all, be flooded out and then you are faced with a blizzard and people do not have any heat? People go through all of this and they continue to flourish, and the churches or the synagogues all come together and people help one another and somehow people make it through, although there is a lot of hurt and there is a lot of pain and probably some people are going to have to go through a fair amount of counseling to get through all this. But at the very minimum couldn't this Congress--I say this now to the majority party--pass this emergency supplemental bill now? Doesn't emergency mean emergency? Could not we provide this assistance to people now? Is that too much to ask? Is that too much for the people of Grand Forks, ND, to ask? Is that too much for the people of East Grand Forks to ask? Is that too much for the people of Warren, MN, to ask? Is that too much for the people of Ada, MN, to ask? I heard my colleague from North Dakota, Senator Conrad, this morning. I thought he was eloquent. He said something like how many more days do people have to wait? I think that is an important question. How many more days, how many more weeks do people have to wait for help? How many more days do the people in our communities who are trying to rebuild their schools or hospitals have to wait? How many more days do the people who are trying to find out whether they are going to be moving or whether they are going to be staying or whether they are going to have money to rebuild their homes or to rebuild their businesses, how much longer do they have to wait? How much longer do senior citizens, many elderly people--a very high percentage of our smaller towns and communities really are comprised of elderly citizens. How much longer do they have to wait to know whether they are going to be able to live there? The answer will be determined by what we do or what we do not do. I am determined as a Senator from Minnesota to do everything I can to make as many of my colleagues as uncomfortable as possible until we take action. Let me repeat that. Whatever I can do to make those who are responsible for this delay uncomfortable, whatever I can do to focus attention on their irresponsibility, to focus attention on their insensitivity, to focus attention on their callousness, whatever I can do to make it clear to the leadership of the House of Representatives it is time to get serious, it is time, as my children would have said when they were younger, to get real I will do. Mr. President, this application form--let me read from this form: The flooding of April 1997 caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damages to private properties, infrastructure and businesses in the city of East Grand Forks. Mr. President, I think what I am going to do is actually read this slowly because right now time will move on slowly on the floor of the Senate: Damage to housing ranged from complete destruction of the properties to severely damaged basements, electrical systems, and heating systems. By the way, built into this disaster relief bill--and I thank my colleagues, both Republicans and Democrats--is some assistance in the low-income home energy assistance program, the LIHEAP program--Senator Stevens helped us on that--which will enable people, for example, to buy new furnaces, which will be a big help. Again, it will not happen, it will not happen until this disaster relief bill is passed: The vast majority of single family and multifamily dwelling units sustained damage. Similar damages to privately owned commercial properties occurred. Beyond the costs of the physical damage, these businesses have also been forced to deal with the economic loss associated with being unable to operate. Many have been unable to reopen and those that have to deal with having lost employees. That is another issue, Mr. President. I know that when I went to Breckenridge, it was just really poignant because there I met with all of these small business people. It was not a meeting that had been arranged. I just came up to look at the flooding. And as soon as I came into the community, all of these small business people came up to me-- and I am not putting them down at all, you understand--and they were absolutely desperate. I mean, there was just desperation and fear; they were really so frightened. And they were saying, look, we can't make this unless we get some assistance. And, Senator Wellstone, if you just give us loans, we can't cash flow those loans and we are not only worried about ourselves, we also are worried about our employees. Well, you know what? All the time I hear speeches given about small businesses, ``Oh, we love small businesses. They are just like family farmers.'' We love them in the abstract. You know what? We have a lot of small businesses in Minnesota and the Dakotas that have been flooded out. We have a lot of small businesses that want to rebuild their businesses. We have a lot of towns that depend on those small businesses. I hear my colleagues always say they are for the small businesses. You know what? The best way you can be for small businesses this week is to do something concrete, which is to stop playing games with this disaster relief bill, pass this piece of legislation, and get the assistance to people so they can start their businesses up again, so they can at least begin the process of rebuilding. The mayor goes on to say: The magnitude of the loss has forced the city to move forward on the implementation of measures to minimize the future possibility of a similar event occurring. At a time when the city is forced to deal with the enormous expense of reconstruction, it is also faced with considering the huge expense of future mitigation. This is going to be a much bigger part of what we do in the future, which is mitigation, which is to try to figure out how to prevent this from happening in the first place. So people who are living in a 100- year floodplain are not necessarily going to live there. We are going to relocate some people. We are going to relocate some businesses. We are going to do that in lots of parts of this country. That is going to be a bigger part of what FEMA and other agencies do as well. The city is currently in the process of planning the construction of a dike-levee system which will ultimately result in the need to relocate households residing on the ``west side'' of the dikes. At this time, the final dike alignment has not been established. However, it is evident that at least 300 households will have to be initially relocated and ultimately 650 to 700 households need to be relocated. Businesses located in the immediate downtown also will need to relocate, probably 10 to 15 commercial properties. Mr. President, I have here somewhere a document where Kit Hadley, who heads up the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, said the other day that this was one of the worst housing disasters in the history of our country. It is true. I mean, when whole towns evacuate, when people become refugees, when so many people are still homeless, people who worked hard all their lives, that is a housing disaster. It is a housing disaster, I say to my colleagues in the House and I say to my colleagues in the Senate, but especially in the House. It is time to get on with the work. It is time to provide some relief to people. It is time to provide people with some assistance. Businesses located in the immediate downtown also will need to relocate, probably 10 to 15 commercial properties. Planning is underway to establish sites to which the business, primarily commercial and residential, relocations will occur. Several potential sites for residential relocation are currently being considered. Although no final decision has been made on the business relocations, the B-N triangle, a parcel situated immediately to the east of the current downtown district, is being considered. At each site to which the relocations will ultimately occur the establishment of essential infrastructure will be necessary-- sewer, sanitary and storm water, and streets. Damage to infrastructure was citywide and included all of the major infrastructural systems. Can you imagine this? Damage to the sanitary sewer, to the storm sewer, to the water system and the streets--all of that damage took place. Other public facilities, such as public buildings, were also damaged, several beyond repair, including the city hall and the fire department. Damages to park and recreation facilities and buildings were severe and widespread. Among the public structures which were destroyed were three schools. Mr. President, this reminds me of a poignant moment. My colleague from the 7th Congressional District, Congressman Peterson, Collin Peterson, spoke at graduation--I heard about this--to the students of East Grand Forks who had been flooded out, whose school had been destroyed. He said to the students, ``You know, as much agony as you and your families have gone through, you have probably learned more than you could have ever learned in school''--and I think that is true--``about yourselves and, really, about your community.'' I would add to Congressman Peterson that I think people in our communities have learned about all of the heroes and heroines that there are. Someday--as long as I am on the floor here for a while--I am going to write a book. Maybe I can get my colleague from Missouri to coauthor it. Because this would cut across all parties and all ideology, and he is like this in terms of what he believes in. What it would be, there was a book written years ago that should be immortal, by James Agee, Walter Evans was the photographer, and the name of the book was, ``Let Us Now Praise Famous Men.'' It's a long story. Forbes magazine had commissioned James Agee back in the 1940's to go, I think, back to Alabama to write about the pathology of poor sharecroppers and tenant farmers. And he went there and lived with people. Mr. President, he, as opposed to his impression before he was there, and his thesis, he thought to himself, ``It's amazing that under these conditions, people are able to survive or even flourish. They should be famous.'' So he wrote a very different kind of book with wonderful, powerful photographs. We could do a book. The Chair is like this as well. Three of us could write this book, and we could title it, ``Let Us Now Praise Famous Men or Women.'' It wouldn't matter whether they were Democrats or Republicans. What it would be, it would be about men and women in communities who do wonderful things in their community. You know what I mean? I mean, it wouldn't be cynical; it would be uplifting. It would be about all the people in our country who do really wonderful work in their communities. No one knows them. They are not nationally famous or internationally famous. They don't do it for that. But they should be famous. Mr. President, only because I don't want to yield the floor, I would ask my colleague whether he would consider doing it with me, but then I would lose my floor privilege. But I am telling you, this would be a good book. There would be more Democrats profiled in the book than Republicans. But, you know, it would be more or less balanced. More or less. To be more serious, it wouldn't have anything to do with parties. But there are a lot of great people in this country. And there are a lot of people who are unsung heroes and heroines. There were a lot of people in East Grand Forks and Granite Falls and Montevideo and Warren and Ada and Grand Forks who are heroes and heroines. Boy, I don't know how--I say to a former mayor--I don't know how the mayors have been able to do this. But we have had Mayor Owens and Mayor Stauss. They have been just unbelievable. Pat Owens has been--people have seen her. She didn't want it. I know that it would have been her prayer to have never had this opportunity to be such a national spokesperson, because she would never have wanted for this to happen in her community. But she has so inspired people, she has, over and over again, called on people not to give up and called on people to have hope, and has said we can rebuild our communities. And now the big missing ingredient is our support, our assistance. We pass disaster relief bills when there are disasters. And this is a disaster. We pass emergency supplemental pieces of legislation when there is an emergency. I really think that we are doing one heck of a job in this Congress of souring people toward our political process by our failure to live up to just the sort of basic standard of decency. Look, I don't like to say this. I should not say it because, I don't know, maybe I am giving ground here. But, you know, if some of my colleagues, some of my colleagues on the other side, if they want to have a continuing resolution and they are going to put it on this disaster relief bill because it gives them leverage--you do have leverage. You do have leverage. When people are desperate, it gives you leverage. If that is what they want to do and send it to the President, playing the game, knowing he is going to veto it, do it. Do it today. Get it done. Send it to the President, he vetoes it, it comes back here, then take it off. Everybody can claim victory. Whatever you want to do. Just get it done and just get this disaster relief bill passed. This assistance from the Congress is not going to make people whole. It is not going to be enough. The only thing this does, it gets people at least a chance, at least a chance. Can we at least do that? Mr. President, this is one of many articles I see here. Maybe there will be an opportunity while I am on the floor. I know there were also--I am looking for the author of this. It was in the Star Tribune. I also know the Pioneer Press--I read of the work of Nick Coleman in the Pioneer Press, which was very, very powerful. I may want to read from that, either this afternoon or tonight or tomorrow. I will not be on the floor all day and night. But I will be on the floor a lot over the next couple of days, over the next couple of weeks--who knows, over the next couple of months. I would think we will get this done. But, you know what, my expectations are pretty low. I could not believe it, Mr. President. We had a press conference last week. I guess it was right before we went into recess. I said at this press conference--I guess it was Thursday, because we went into recess that Friday. I said that the House not sending us back something to work with, it was probably the worst--it was, for me--the lowest or most disappointing or worst time I had in the Senate. Because I thought that in the end, the goodness of people would come through. And even though people disagreed on the continuing resolution and whatnot, people would at least agree to agree on what we agreed on and get the disaster relief to people who were in such need. There was someone at this press conference, a journalist. There was some laughter. I said, ``Wait a minute. You know, I don't think I am being naive. I don't think this is naive at all to believe in the goodness of people, including my colleagues.'' I love being a Senator. I get goose bumps when I have a chance to be on the floor of the Senate. I do. I never thought I would have a chance to be here. It is a huge honor, and every day you hope you will do your job well. You make plenty of mistakes, but you do your very best. It's a huge honor. I was a teacher for 20 years. I want young people to be interested in public service. I like the people I work with. I enjoy people here in the Senate and I enjoy people in the House, agree or disagree. But there comes a certain point in time where, you know, the indignation just kind of takes over. And I have just run out of patience. This is outrageous. This is outrageous. Frankly, I would say to people in the House of Representatives, who went into recess without sending that disaster relief bill over here and getting the job done, shame on you. Shame on you. Shame on you. Shame on you. It is not too much to expect for you to get some help, some assistance to people in our States who are in such pain and really need the help now. They really do. Time is not neutral for them. Time rushes on. I mean, if they do not get the help, people are going to leave or families are going to just be under such pressure and without any hope, who knows what happens? But I will tell you one thing--I will tell you one thing, Mr. President--I do not want to go back to East Grand Forks and some of the other communities and look at people and try to explain to them why in the world this Congress did not take any action. I just cannot explain it. And the one thing I do know is, even if I inconvenience some of my colleagues, the one thing I do know is there isn't going to be anybody in Minnesota that is going to be able to say I did not fight for this, win or lose. So I get to speak on the floor of the Senate now. And I will continue to speak on the floor of the Senate for a while. And then I just want to put my colleagues on notice: Everything you bring on the floor of the Senate, everything you bring this week and next week, I will look for leverage, I will somehow get to the floor, and I will do everything I can to put the focus back on getting emergency assistance to people in Minnesota and the Dakotas and our other States as well. You know, we have some distorted priorities here when people want to play games with the lives of people who are in such pain, in such agony. This is an article from the Star Tribune, Minnesota Star Tribune. It is called ``Stains of Pain.'' Mr. President, the top of it reads, ``The people at ground zero of the Red River flood want desperately to get on with their lives. But how do they do that when they are adrift in such wreckage?'' The people at ground zero of the Red River flood want desperately to get on with their lives. But how do they do that when they are adrift in such wreckage? Grand Forks, N.D.--On Belmont Road, a fading sign propped against a sagging mound of clothes, furniture and appliances proclaims, ``We are not what we own.'' At the Darbyshire house on Polk Street, a battered house knocked off its foundation, a pink ``condemned'' notice is taped on the front door. Look down from the notice and you look into what was the Darbyshires' basement. In north Grand Forks, in the Riverside neighborhood, a bright yellow house is stained dull brown to the eaves. The Riverside Park swimming pool is a sewage lagoon. Across the Red River, on the northwestern edge of East Grand Forks, a girl plays by the street, listless and unsmiling. She tosses a scrap of something into the air, watches it fall, then tosses it again. I am going to read that again. ``Across the Red River, on the northwestern edge of East Grand Forks, a girl plays by the street, listless and unsmiling.'' Mr. President, you are talking about a little girl listless and unsmiling. I guess so, given what she and her family have been through. Maybe what we need to do is we need to understand that these words or these articles, this is not just a distraction, this is not just statistics, we are talking about people's lives. This little girl, Mr. President, listless and unsmiling, should not have to stay listless and unsmiling. Little children should be smiling. Little children should be happy. Little children should be looking for their future. We ought to give this little girl and her family, Mr. President, some reason to expect that will happen. And yet we cannot provide disaster relief for people who have been flooded out of their homes? We cannot provide support for little children? Sounds kind of melodramatic, Mr. President. Mr. President, I do not want to lose my floor privilege. Mr. President, ask unanimous consent that my colleague from Kansas be able to give a tribute to Senator Strom Thurmond, after which I then would retain my right to the floor.

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I want to mention to some of my colleagues that with some regret, at least for a while this afternoon while I have the floor, there probably will not be a lot of discussion about this important piece of legislation, because I am now at the point, as a Senator from Minnesota, where I could not have any more patience for the political process here. We have had people in our States, and the Chair, I know, would feel the same, and I believe my colleague from Missouri would feel the same way, who have been through an absolute nightmare. We have communities where everybody had to evacuate--total devastation. We have one community in Minnesota, East Grand Forks, across the Red River from Grand Forks, and everybody had to leave and the people are still waiting for the Congress to provide them with relief. And the House of Representatives had the nerve to go into recess without providing that assistance. Well, Mr. President, for a while this afternoon the only point of discussion while I have the floor is going to be about the problems that we are facing in States that have been flooded, in States that are waiting for this disaster relief, because I think this ought to be the priority for the Congress. Whatever I know about this political process, whatever leverage I have as a Senator, I am going to use it. I will slow up whatever I can slow up. I will stop whatever I can stop. I will do it this week, and I will do it next week and I will do it as many weeks as I need to, until that disaster relief bill is passed. I do not know what else to do. I do not know what else to do. Mr. President, let me just talk a little bit about what is going on here. What we have is a situation where some people are playing politics with the emergency supplemental as opposed to getting this relief out to people who are trying to rebuild their lives. Can you imagine, I say to the Chair and my colleague from Missouri, can you imagine how people in Idaho and Missouri would feel when their homes have been destroyed? We worked together in a bipartisan fashion, and Senator Stevens was a big part of that. We came up with not only the funding for FEMA, but most important of all is some small business loans we came up with in what is called Community Development Block Grants, moneys which would enable people to move forward with buyouts for people who live in the floodplain, enable people to have assistance to rebuild their homes. That was the good news part. We were on our way. And then we had a disagreement. We had a disagreement over something called the CR. Frankly, people back in the Dakotas and Minnesota do not know that much about a CR and they do not really care too much. They just thought we would have the elementary decency of providing them with some help in their hour of need. But we got a debate about the CR. We have another debate about roads and public parks and maybe a couple of other matters as well. I would have thought that my colleagues--and I think some Republicans agree with me, so I do not think this is really so much a partisan issue; I know that in our States, Republicans agree--I would have thought that my colleagues would have had the elementary decency, the elementary decency before they went into recess, and we were going to stop them, and I cannot even remember the technical maneuver, but we were going to try and force a vote on adjournment, I guess it was, but they did not call it adjournment. We were in recess. So, theoretically, every 2 or 3 days, we were in session, but we really were not. Then people in the House of Representatives could then vote against adjournment and feel good about it, knowing that nothing had been done. I could not believe it. The leadership in the House of Representatives--I do not even call it leadership when people in our States are in such need, waiting for some final assurance that relief is going to be forthcoming--goes into recess. They don't even have the elementary decency to put aside what differences we have and just go forward--make sure that people know that they are going to be able to rebuild their homes, make sure that people know they are going to be able to move back into their homes, and make sure that people know that they are going to be able to go on with their lives. But no. I am Jewish. I throw my hands around here. I am sorry, my colleagues. But, no. They go into recess. And I am supposed to try to explain to people in Minnesota and North Dakota and South Dakota how we can play these kind of games here? People can't believe it. To all of my colleagues, to all of the people who are here today, no wonder so many Americans sour on our political process. You have floods the likes of which haven't been seen for 400 or 500 years. You have total devastation. The hospitals are destroyed, schools are destroyed, and everybody in the town are all leaving. You have flooding. You have hail. You have snow. You have fire. And, in spite of all of that, the goodness of people comes out. They support each other, they love each other, and they try to get back with their lives. But they know they need help. And the House of Representatives goes into recess. It is unbelievable. Now we are back here, and it is Tuesday. We hear that maybe this week this disaster relief bill will not be passed. Or maybe, people say, ``Well, play a game and we will put on a continuing resolution.'' What does a continuing resolution have to do with the budget or have to do with getting disaster relief for people? It is called disaster relief because it is disaster. It is called an emergency supplemental bill because it is an emergency. Stop playing political games with people's lives. So, Mr. President, now we have a situation where some people are thinking, OK, what we will do is put a continuing resolution on this bill; it has nothing to do with emergency supplemental assistance; we will send it to the President; then he has already said he will veto it; and then it will come back here. And I don't know what they will do next. Why are they sending it to the President when you know he is going to veto it? If you want to debate the budget, let's debate the budget. If you want to debate the parks and the other issues, fine. But can't we just put aside our differences and please get the supplemental assistance to people? This is really a huge issue. Mr. President, there are families and business owners in Grand Forks, ND. My colleague from North Dakota talked about this, and East Grand Forks. They need to know whether they are going to be part of the floodplain buyout. But they do not know. They do not know whether or not there is going to be a buyout. They do not know whether they should move. They do not know whether they should try to come back to their homes. They don't know whether there is going to be any assistance at all. The State does not know whether it should go forward. The mayors do not know what they can say to the citizens because they do not know what we are going to do because people have been waiting and waiting and waiting. Some of my colleagues today are going to wait because I am going to talk on the floor of the Senate for a while as well because it is just simply unconscionable and it is simply indefensible that we just do not get on with the business of providing people with this assistance right now. Mr. President, we have another problem. If we are going to start rebuilding--I think maybe in Idaho and less in Missouri. But in Idaho I think this is a bit of an issue as well. We have to get going because our building season is over come mid to late October. So, if we do not get the approved funding now and we don't started with the construction we are not going to get it done. Minnesota is a cold weather State. It is without a doubt the best State in the country. But it is a cold State. We have to get the funding right now, or we are not going to get the construction work done. Colleagues, there are very good, very wonderful, very strong, very loving people in Minnesota and the Dakotas, and others States as well are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. They are trying somehow to rebuild their lives. They have been through a living hell. You would not wish it on anyone. They have been waiting and waiting for us to have the decency to please get the assistance to them. And we are still playing political games here. Mr. President, the supplemental contains $500 million in CDBG funding for flood assistance. This program is one of the oldest Federal block grant programs in existence. This gives the States the most flexibility, or it could be the most flexibility for local communities. Let me explain what we are talking about here. Whether we are talking about floods in the Midwest, or hurricanes in the South, or earthquakes in the West, this CDBG money is critical because it fills in the cracks. In other words, what happens is FEMA money is good for public infrastructure and some help for homeowners and the small business money in loans. But the problem is many people can't cash flow any more loans. They can't get their businesses going. They can't rebuild their homes unless they get this community development block grant money. We have to task--thank you, Republicans, and, thank you, Democrats. We work together. That was the right thing to do. But now--for the last 13 or 14 days, whatever it has been--people back in Minnesota cannot believe what they are seeing here. They don't understand these games. They don't understand why it is we just do not provide them with the assistance that they need. Mr. President, we have seen homes destroyed. We have seen city blocks immersed in water. And our communities, Ada, Warren, East Grand Forks, and others are in tremendous amount of need. They are in hurt. And they have the task of rebuilding their neighborhoods block by block and home by home. I would like to thank FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency for their work, and its Director James Lee Witt for his leadership. He has been great. I would like to thank all of the FEMA people who are out in Minnesota. They have been great. They are real heroes and real heroines. They are doing everything they can to help people. They are working with our community. And they are thinking about again buyouts and relocation plans. They are thinking about how to enable people to move back into their homes, and how people can rebuild their businesses. But we need to get the funding to our States now. We need to begin the process of rebuilding our communities. Mr. President, I don't know any other way to say it. I would say to my colleagues: Quit playing political football with the lives of disaster victims. Quit playing political football with the lives of disaster victims. I don't know anything else to do. I mean, I apologize to my colleagues. I am going to continue to talk for a while--not all day and all night and all day tomorrow. But I do want to speak for a while about this. Really, every opportunity I get as a Senator I am going to continue to come out and hold the floor. And I think just about every other Senator will do the same thing from our States. This is going to go on. Any Senator would do it, Democrat, or Republican. What else are you supposed to do? I mean the first thing you do is you try to appeal to the common sense of some of your colleagues. You say, look, we have some differences here. So why don't we just put those differences aside and just get the assistance to people because we don't differ on that. This is an emergency. Let's get the emergency assistance to people now. We tried to make that appeal. That didn't work. Then you try and appeal to the goodness of people. You say, look, people are hurting. People need some certainty. People need to have some confidence that we are going to provide some assistance to people. Please, Representatives; please Senators--I think even more Representatives now that I think about it on the House side--please. Can't you just put aside the differences? Can't we just go forward with what we agree on and get this disaster relief to people? That doesn't work. Then you try another appeal. You say, look, Senator, if it was your State, you would want to get that assistance out to the people. You would have a tough time going home and looking at people in the eye and having them look at you and try to explain what in the world is going on here. So you try to appeal to colleagues, and you say, ``Look, I have always been there for you when you needed help in Missouri, or you needed help in Idaho, or whatever State, which is true. I remember the flooding and what they went through just a few years ago. Now we need help. Please, won't you help us get this through? And that doesn't work. So, since none of that works, there is only one thing to do. And that is just use the Senate rules and figure out your leverage and just do not let the U.S. Congress--in particular the House of Representatives which has this held up--go on with business as usual. We are going to talk about what is going on in Minnesota, the Dakotas, Missouri, and California, and a variety of other States. Mr. President, I have here a letter from the mayor of East Grand Forks, MN, Lynn Stauss. I tell you. My colleague, Representative Collin Peterson, made a very good point this morning. Lynn Stauss is a part-time mayor. He makes about $5,300 a year. He is coming back out here tomorrow, and the mayor of Grand Forks, ND, as well. They shouldn't have to keep coming out here. But they have to keep coming out here to keep saying to people: ``Please, Senators and Representatives, don't make the people in our communities an abstraction.'' We are talking about real men, real women, and their children. I don't know how the mayor has done it. He has been incredibly courageous. He has given people a lot of hope under some very difficult conditions, I say to a former mayor, Mr. President. But I know it gets hard after a while. People start to run out of hope when we don't come through here in the Congress. So this is a letter dated May 20, 1997. I should have brought my glasses knowing that I was going to be on the floor for a while. Do you have any glasses? [Laughter.] These glasses are too conservative. I thank my colleague from Missouri. I have never understood how such a good person could have such bad ideas. [Laughter.] Dear Senator Dorgan: We understand that there are currently proposals to dispose of the five hundred million in CDBG grants for disaster aid in two separate payments. Because of the magnitude of destruction of the record setting flood of 1997 and the ice storm preceding the flood on April 4, 1997 throughout the Red River Valley, especially to the communities of Grand Forks, North Dakota and East Grand Forks, Minnesota, it is imperative that the total amount of five hundred million be released to our communities without delay. The people of our communities have suffered the loss of income, homes and businesses. In addition, our streets, water system, electrical system and sanitation system have been severely damaged and require immediate attention. The public facilities as we once knew them are virtually non- existent. We are now a community without a city hall, a library, several schools, fire hall and senior citizens center. Our number one priority is the acquisition of over 600 homes and businesses from the floodway. Immediate acquisition and relocation is the only preventive measure in relieving stress and allowing our citizens an opportunity to rebuild in our communities. Because of our short window of construction, if we do not act now our businesses and residents will have no alternative but to relocate in other communities. We enclose for your information a copy of a proposal from Wynne Consultants which clearly depicts the aftermath and total devastation left by the flood and ice storm. We believe the report will provide you with a comprehensive understanding of our urgent, basic needs. The five hundred million in CDBG grants must be released to our communities to allow us the flexibility to rebuild and move forward with our lives. Mr. President, this is from the mayor, and I just want to emphasize the importance of the words ``to rebuild and move forward with our lives.'' Again, Mr. President, I am sorry to inconvenience colleagues, but I feel as if people in Minnesota have been inconvenienced, and I think it is important to focus on this because I think we should pass this before we do anything else. An emergency supplemental is an emergency supplemental. That does not mean messing around, playing all sorts of political games. And disaster relief is disaster relief. It seems to me to be patently unfair and insensitive and unconscionable for the House of Representatives to go into recess and not pass this disaster relief bill or for this week all of us in the Congress to mess around and mess around and mess around and not do this work. If there is one thing we should do this week, it should be to pass this disaster relief bill. This should come before anything else. This disaster relief bill should come before, I say to my colleague--I know how much work he has put into this, and I still think there is a possibility of passing a good piece of legislation when we get down to really give-and-take discussion and work together. I do not think this bill will pass in its present form. I do not think it should. (Mr. KEMPTHORNE assumed the chair.)

Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, in responding to the question that the Senator from Washington has raised, that is really what is at issue here. There is an alternative that Senator Baucus and others have presented which really does give the employees the flexibility, if that is what this is about. We have to make sure that employees have the flexibility so that if they need to take the time off--time, I might make the point, time that they banked--if they need their comptime because they want to go to school and visit with the teacher or because they have an elderly parent that is ill, they ought to be able to do it. If we really want to give them flexibility, we should give them flexibility. That is not in this piece of legislation. I also say to the Senator from Washington that, in addition, we have a very serious problem here. Sometimes I think here in the Senate we lose sight of the reality of the circumstances of many families in our country. We have a paradoxical situation where we have this impressive abundance, an affluence and good macroeconomic indicators, but at the same time, we have large numbers of families that are struggling to earn a decent living and raise their children successfully. People are still feeling the economic squeeze, and one of the ways people are able to put food on the table and support their families is to be able to get that overtime pay for working overtime. We are not going to abandon that principle. This legislation in its present form will be defeated again tomorrow. People gave their sweat and their tears for fair labor standards and for a 40-hour week and for the idea that if you work overtime you get overtime pay. Now, if we want to really give employees the flexibility, we should do so. But you do not have a cut in pay with flextime, you do not have a cut in pay by abolishing the 40-hour week and going to an 80-hour 2-week framework. You make sure that employees, in fact, if they bank that extra time, that flextime, are able to take it off, time and a half for every hour worked overtime to be with their child or to be at a doctor's office with their parent. They get to do it. They do not have to ask for permission. You certainly make sure that you do not have any discrimination whereby this becomes too good a deal in its present form for too many employers, and the only people, I say to my colleague from Washington, that they give any overtime to are those people who will not ask for overtime pay, who will only ask for comptime. That is what is at issue here. I agree with the question, which is this is all about working families. This is all about how people balance commitment to work with balancing a commitment to family. But this piece of legislation does not give employees the flexibility, and this piece of legislation does not give people the guarantee that they will not be discriminated against and no longer able to obtain overtime pay for overtime work which is so important to so many families that are barely able to make ends meet. This piece of legislation takes the Fair Labor Standards Act and it turns it on its head. It literally overturns 50 or 60 years of people's history. It is too bad, because we could pass a piece of legislation. My colleague from Missouri has a good idea, at least in the goal of giving employees the flexibility. But in its present form, this piece of legislation will go nowhere. Mr. President, now, I understand I have not looked at some of the amendments--Senator Grassley's amendment. We also, in committee, were talking about the whole problem of bankruptcy and what happens to people who have earned this time. I think maybe the ceiling is too low and we have to have a higher threshold. Maybe something can be worked out on that, but then I hear there is another amendment that wants to apply this piece of legislation to the Congress, to staff, the people who work here. Well, Mr. President, I think that most of the people who work here--I have to look at all of the specifics, but I would think that a lot of people who work here might say, well, we would rather go forward and not backward. Right now, I think, people would be kind of worried about losing some of their fair labor standard protection or they would be worried about not being able to work overtime and get overtime pay. I do not think people want to see that. I also think employees here working with us want to make sure that if they bank the time, they will be able to take it off when they need to take it off to be with their families. So, again, Mr. President, you cannot take a piece of legislation that is flawed, I say with some regret, badly flawed for the vast majority of families in this country, and now apply it to people who work here, which just compounds the problem. Make this a good piece of legislation, and then, I say to my colleague from Iowa, and then we should apply it. I am all for that. Disaster Relief

Paul Wellstone

Speeches

Manage analytics