OF MY PROTOBACCO VOTES. AND WHAT WERE THEY?
           THEY WERE PROCEDURAL VOTES. THEY WERE VOTES ON MOTIONS TO
           TABLE. THEY WERE VOTES IN SUPPORT OF THE LEADER MOVING
           LEGISLATION FORWARD. THE ONE TOBACCO VOTE THAT COUNTED WHICH
           WAS A CLOTURE VOTE ON SENATOR MCCAIN'S BILL, I WAS IN THE
           ANTITOBACCO FORCES FORCES, AND INDEED I HAD AND USED DURING THE
           CAMPAIGN LETTERS THANKING ME FOR MY STRONG ANTITOBACCO STAND

           FROM THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF PEDIATRIC SURGEONS, THE SET RA, ET
           CETERA, SET HE THE D -- ET CETERA, ALL OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED
           IN THE TOBACCO FIGHT KNEW I WAS ON THEIR SUED. THEY KNEW THE
           PROCESS AROUND HERE WELL ENOUGH TO KNOW MY VOTES WERE MEANLESS
           AS FAR AS THE REAL ISSUE WAS CONCERNED. I TELL YOU WHAT I SAID
           TO HIM -- WE CHECKED HIS F.E.C. REPORT AND SAID TO TO MY
           OPPONENT, YOU PAID $20,000 TO A COMPUTER FIRM TO RESEARCH MY
           VOTING RECORD AND COME UP WITH THIS LIST. I RECOMMEND YOU CALL

           THEM AND GET YOUR MONEY BACK, BECAUSE YOU WASTED IT. THEY GAVE
           YOU WRONG INFORMATION. HE SAID, I WAS PRO LIQUOR. HE HAD A
           VOTING RECORD THAT SAID I WAS IN FAVOR OF ALCOHOL ALCOHOL.
           PARDON ME?
           WELL, WE GOT INTO IT, WE FOUND OUT WHAT THE VOTE WAS THAT I
           SUPPOSEDLY HAD CAST THAT MADE ME PROALCOHOL. IT HAD TO DID WITH
           FEDERAL HIGHWAY FUNDS AND THE RIGHTS OF STATES TO SET THEIR OWN

           LEVELS OF ALCOHOL TOLERANCE AND BECAUSE I AM IN FAVOR OF STATES
           CONTROLLING CRO THAT AND VOTED GUNS HAVING THE FEDERAL
           GOVERNMENT DICTATE IT, SUDDENLY I HAD CAST A PRO-ALCOHOL VOTE.
           HE WENT ON AND ON AND ON IN THIS SAME VEIN. SO MR. PRESIDENT, I
           UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON HERE. AMENDMENTS ARE NOT BEING
           OFFERED FOR LEGISLATIVE PURPOSES. BILLS ARE NOT BEING CALLED UP
           FOR LEGISLATIVE PURPOSES. RECORDED VOTES ARE NOT BEING CALLED

           FOR BECAUSE SOMEONE WANTS TO IMPROVE THE LEGISLATION. RECORDS
           ARE BEING BUILT ON ISSUES THAT CAN BE MISREPRESENTED AS SERIOUS
           CHALLENGES TO INCUMBENTS, AND THEY ARE BEING BROUGHT UP AGAIN
           AND AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN, SO THAT PEOPLE CAN STAND UP IN A
           CAMPAIGN AND SAY THAT INCUMBENT VOTED WRONG 17 TIMES. LYNDON
           JOHNSON WOULD NOT HAVE STOOD FOR IT. EVERETT DIRKSEN WOULD HAVE

           HAD A QUIP ABOUT IT THAT WOULD HAVE MADE EVERYBODY LAUGH. BUT
           IT IS NOW THE WAY THINGS ARE DONE IN THIS INSTITUTION. WELL,
           MR. PRESIDENT, I SAID WHEN I STOOD THAT I AM RESPONDING TO THE
           SUGGESTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC LEADER THAT SOMEHOW WHAT IS GOING
           ON HERE IS DESTRUCTIVE OF THE INSTITUTION. I AGREE THAT WHAT IS
           GOING ON HERE IS DESTRUCTIVE OF THE INSTITUTION, BUT I DO NOT
           PUT IT AT THE FEET OF THE MAJORITY LEADER. I THINK IT HAS

           HISTORIC ROOTS THAT GO BACK BEYOND THIS MAJORITY LEADER, GO
           BACK BEFORE THE PREVIOUS MAJORITY LEADERS. I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT
           STARTED HAPPENING. BUT WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY FROM THE DAY
           WHEN THE SENATE WOULD VOTE WITH A ROLL CALL VOTE ABOUT 50 TIMES
           IN A SESSION -- THAT'S HOW OFTEN MY FATHER VOTED ON ROLL CALL
           VOTES, A DAY WHEN THE CHAMBER WOULD FILL UP TO HEAR THE DEBATE
           BECAUSE IT WAS A SIGNIFICANT VOTE -- WE HAVE COME A LONG WAY
           FROM THAT. THE INSTITUTION HAS BECOME PRIMARILY A CAMPAIGN

           PLATFORM. AND LET US MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT. WHAT IS GOING ON
           RIGHT NOW IN THE CHAMBER IS ALL GEARED TO NOVEMBER AND NOT IN
           ANY SENSE GEARED TOWARDS LEGISLATION. IT IS NOT GEARED TOWARDS
           SOLVING PROBLEMS. IT IS NOT GEARED TOWARDS MOVING THE REPUBLIC
           FORWARD. IT IS ALL GEARED TOWARDS GETTING THOSE MULTIPLE VOTES
           THAT A COMPUTER CAN FIND AND THEN PUT ON A WEB SITE THAT CAN BE

           USED IN A CAMPAIGN SPEECH ON THE PART OF A CHALLENGER. I AGREE
           WITH THE DEMOCRATIC LEADER THAT THIS CHEAPENS THE INSTITUTION.
           I AGREE WITH THE DEMOCRATIC LEADER THAT IT THREATENS THE
           INSTITUTION. BUT I DISAGREE WITH HIM AS TO THE SOLUTION. I
           THINK ALL OF US, AS SENATORS, NEED TO BACK AWAY FROM THE IDEA
           THAT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF BEING IN THE UNITED STATES IS TO
           GIVE -- UNITED STATES SENATE IS TO GIVE CAMPAIGN SPEECHES. BACK

           AWAY FROM THE IDEA THAT THE PRIMARY FUNCTION OF COMING TO THE
           FLOOR IS TO DO THINGS THAT WILL GIVE YOU AN ADVANTAGE IN
           NOVEMBER THAT YOU CAN MISREPRESENT AND ATTACK AN INCUMBENT
           OVER. THERE IS A TIME FOR PARTISANSHIP, THERE IS A TIME TO BE
           VERY FIRM ABOUT THE POSITION THAT YOU TAKE, BUT THERE IS ALSO A
           TIME TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE INSTITUTION IS THREATENED IF YOU LET
           THAT PARTISANSHIP GET OUT OF HAND. IT REMINDS ME, MR.
           PRESIDENT, OF THE SIGNATURE COMMENT THAT COMES TO US OUT OF THE

           VIETNAM WAR WHERE A CAPTAIN -- I BELIEVE HE WAS A CAPTAIN --
           WAS QUOTED AS SAYING AFTER A PARTICULAR BATTLE, "IT WAS
           NECESSARY TO DESTROY THE VILLAGE IN ORDER TO PACIFY IT." IF IT
           IS NECESSARY TO DESTROY THE INSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
           SENATE IN ORDER TO MAKE IT PART OF MY PARTY'S CONTROL, I WANT
           NO PART OF THAT ACTIVITY. IN MY OWN CAMPAIGN I HAVE REFUSED TO

           ENGAGE IN NEGATIVE ADVERTISING. I WANT NO PART OF WHAT I CALL
           CARVILLE IT ISISM. THAT IS THE POLITICS OF PERSONAL DESTRUCTION
           THAT HAS BECOME SO PREVALENT IN THE LAST EIGHT YEARS. I WANT NO
           PART OF IT. I REMEMBER A MAN SAYING TO ME IF YOU DON'T GO
           NEGATIVE YOU WILL NOT WIN THE NOMINATION. AND I SAID TO HIM,
           THE NOMINATION IS NOT WORTH IT. I WOULD RATHER RETAIN MYSELF
           RESPECT THAN GAIN A SEAT IN THE UNITED STATES SENATE.

           FORTUNATELY I HAVE A BOTH. I SAY TO ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES ON
           BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, BECAUSE REPUBLICANS CAMPAIGN HERE JUST
           AS VIGOROUSLY AS
           
           DEMOCRATS: LET'S STOP USING THE UNITED STATES SENATE AS AN
           INSTITUTION SOLELY FOR CAMPAIGN PURPOSES. LET'S STOP USING THE
           RULES OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE THAT CAN ALLOW VOTES AND THAT
           CAN CALL UP AMENDMENTS SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF CREATING
           CAMPAIGN RECORDS. LET'S RECOGNIZE THAT THE PURPOSE OF THE

           UNITED STATES SENATE IS FOR LEGISLATION, NOT CAMPAIGNING. AND
           IF WE CAN DO THAT, ALL OF US, WE WILL NOT GET BACK TO THE DAYS
           THAT I HAVE DESCRIBED DESCRIBED, BUT WE WILL AT LEAST GET
           TOWARDS THEM IN THE SENSE THAT THIS INSTITUTION WILL SURVIVE AS
           WE LIKE TO CALL IT, THE GREATEST DELIBERATIVE BODY IN THE
           WORLD, AND NOT THE GREATEST CAMPAIGN FORUM IN THE WORLD. I

           THANK THE CHAIR FOR HIS PATIENCE. I THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR
           THEIR INDULGENCE AS I HAVE TAKEN THIS MEMORY TRIP, BUT I HOPE
           THAT ALL OF US CAN RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE SOMETHING TO LEARN
           FROM THE PAST AND FROM THE KIND OF INSTITUTION THIS ONCE WAS,
           AND WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO SEE TO IT THAT IT DOES NOT

           DEGENERATE INTO WHAT IT COULD BE. I YIELD THE FLOOR. MR.
           PRESIDENT, I SUGGEST THE ABSENCE OF A QUORUM.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE CLERK WILL CALL THE ROLL.
           
           
           
           QUORUM CALL:
           
{END: 2000/05/22 TIME: 13-15 , Mon.  106TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}