April 25, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S5659

tyrant was saying the only way we can

prevail and continue this tyranny is to

get the lawyers because they are the

only ones that understand and know

and stand in our way of freedom, and

we can continue this tyranny. So it

was not a pejorative saying of ‘‘kill all

the lawyers.’’

We can go through to the Founding

Fathers who were all lawyers and drew

the Constitution and worked at it overnight. We can come right on down the

line with respect to the lawyers in the

history of this land, whether it be

President Lincoln in the days during

the Civil War, or most recently here, in

civil rights cases, Thurgood Marshall

and others. If they had not had those

lawyers, I can tell you now, having

been at the local level over the many

years, had Thurgood Marshall not succeeded in Brown versus Board of Education, you would not have found the

advancements made.

Advancements were not made as a result of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 so

much as the advancement made in the

1954 Brown versus Board of Education

decision by the U.S. Supreme Court,

brought by the trial lawyer for the

NAACP, Thurgood Marshall.

I will bring the cases, when we have

time, to the attention of my colleagues. The hour is late and I want to

yield to others to be heard on this.

Since it has just come up, I have represented to the distinguished manager

of the bill, it is not our intent to delay.

We will survey colleagues on this side

of the aisle and see what amendments

they want to present. I want to see if

there are those who want to talk on

this particular measure before we vote.

And pending that, Mr. President, I

yield the floor. I suggest the absence of

a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.

SANTORUM). The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to

call the roll.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I ask

unanimous consent that the order for

the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without

objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, my

staff brought to my attention—I wish

we had billable hours for Senators. We

could make a living up here. Maybe

that is the next amendment we will

have if they insist on this amendment,

Mr. President.

Pending that, we have the Model

Rules of Professional Conduct and the

Code of Judicial Conduct by the American Bar Association.

I look at rule 1.4, ‘‘Communication’’

and I read:

A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and

promptly comply with reasonable requests

for information.

A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding

the representation.

That is the American Bar Association Model Rule that we all are governed by.

With respect to the fees themselves,

rule 1.5:

(A) A lawyer’s fee shall be reasonable. The

factors to be considered in determining the

reasonableness of a file include the following:

(1) the time and labor required, the novelty

and difficulty of the questions involved, the

skill requisite to perform the legal service

properly;

(2) the likelihood, if apparent to a client,

that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by

the lawyer;

I take that, Mr. President, to be no

conflict of interest.

(3) the fee customarily charged in the locality with similar legal services;

(4) the amount involved and the results obtained;

(5) the time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances;

(6) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client;

(7) the experience, repetition, and the ability of the lawyer or lawyers performing the

services;

(8) where the fee is fixed, whether the fee is

fixed or contingent.

It goes on in detail on the basis of

the rate of fee, the terms of payment,

and all the necessary things—the divisions of fee, how to settle if there is a

dispute about the fee, all are matters

of disclosure.

What they are really coming with on

product liability is an assault against

the bar. I know the former distinguished Vice President of the United

States thought it was good politics,

and he brought up about lawyers at the

American Bar Association.

If a person practices law, they are

under the rule and guidelines. It is still

a profession. Just like I have resisted

actually the TV coverage of the proceedings here of the U.S. Senate because we could get a lot more work

done and we did a lot more work and

we got things done.

I also have resisted the so-called advertisement by attorneys with the

neon sign ‘‘Divorces, divorces,’’ or ‘‘If

you think you are hurt,’’ or, ‘‘We get

more money in our claims than anybody else.’’ I think that is unethical. I

hate to see that coming about with the

particular profession.

If we take the television out of the

O.J. Simpson courtroom, that case

could be handled in the next 3 weeks.

But it will take the next 3 months at

least with TV there. The idea is to get

justice and not to amuse the public

generally.

I hope we get the television out of

this body, the television out of the

courtroom, and get back to some economic sense, go to work for the people

of America, and certainly not take

what never has been recognized as a

national problem, except with respect

to the American Bar Association and

its code of conduct which it has over

the many, many years. It has never

made a national problem to be legislated upon.

I know what they have in mind, and

I think that my amendment will help

them get at the 60,000 billable hour

lawyers, and not the trial lawyers.

They really go after the trial lawyers

and product liability.

I want to talk about the corporate

lawyers and that billable hour crowd

that extends out. I have heard my colleague from West Virginia. He does not

have any understanding of the law

practice. He says, why, at the State

level it is very difficult to get product

liability reform. False. We have it in 46

of the 50 States in the last 15 years.

He says one of the reasons we cannot

get it are these trial lawyers holding

things up because they like to extend

their cases and get more money. Extend more cases, I get more expenses.

I am paid on a contingency basis. I

am not paid by a billable hour. The fellow who gets more money is the insurance company lawyer, the corporate

lawyer. They love it. They try to

stretch it out, get continuances, make

more motions and everything else. I

got 10 or 15 good cases in the office

that I have taken for seriously injured

clients. I have hundreds of thousands of

dollars in time and costs wrapped up. I

am really having to carry and finance,

which we do. I have done it in my private practice.

We know how it is in corporate law.

They have the mahogany desks and the

Persian rugs, and they sit down there

with the paneled walls and just answer

the phone and everything. Answer the

phone and say, by the way, charge him

that I talked to him on the phone. I

never heard of a contingency fee lawyer say I talked to somebody and

charged so much. They charge so much

per telephone call, so much per letter,

so much per hour, so much per this.

There is more per fees in the practice

than we could ever contemplate.

Heavens, let us not write this bureaucracy into the law.

Mr. President, I suggest the absence

of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to

call the roll.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask

unanimous consent that the order for

the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without

objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask

unanimous consent I be permitted to

speak as in morning business for 10

minutes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without

objection, it is so ordered.

IN MEMORY OF SENATOR JOHN C.

fSTENNIS

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I

would like to take a few minutes to

discuss the life and career of Senator

John C. Stennis, who passed away earlier this week.

Senator Stennis served in this Chamber for 41 years. His work here included
S5660 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE April 25, 1995

serving as chairman of the Senate

Armed Services and the Senate Appropriations Committees and as President

pro tempore of this body.

Among his legislative achievements

was his ability to bend and flow with

the times. Once a staunch segregationist, Senator Stennis cast his vote for

the Voting Rights Act of 1982.

One area in which he never changed,

however, was in upholding the safety

and security of this great country. Senator Stennis warned against overextending our military capacity. He

also warned against wasteful defense

spending. But he never wavered in his

support of the country’s national defense and ensuring that it maintained

the military capacity to guarantee our

freedoms and our liberties.

During his four decades in the U.S.

Senate, Senator Stennis was always an

abiding example of integrity and fortitude. His respect for the institution

of the Senate and the law of the United

States made him an early opponent of

the excesses and abuses of Senator Joe

McCarthy. As a result, he and Senator

Sam Ervin were named as the two

Democratic members on the Watkins

committee that investigated the recklessness of Senator McCarthy and led

to his censorship.

In July 1965, the Senate created the

Select Committee on Standards and

Conduct, the forerunner of our current

Select Committee on Ethics. This was

a controversial creation, and everyone

knew that whoever chaired it would be

in a difficult position. The Senate had

traditionally relied upon the voters of

a State to discipline a Senator for improper behavior, and institutional discipline is a painful problem in an institution that depends on the collegiality

of its Members. The only logical choice

for this important and difficult leadership position was Senator Stennis. The

Mississippi Senator became so successful and so respected in this position

that the committee quickly became

known as the ‘‘Stennis Committee.’’

Mr. President, the career of Senator

John C. Stennis was marked, not only

with legislative triumphs, but with numerous personal triumphs over personal adversity.

In 1973, he was shot by robbers in

front of his house and left for dead.

In 1983, his beloved wife of 52 years,

Coy Hines Stennis passed away.

In 1984, a battle with cancer resulted

in the loss of one of his legs and confined him to a wheelchair. While in the

hospital recuperating from the surgery,

he was visited by the President of the

United States, Ronald Reagan. President Reagan later said that he had

dreaded going to the hospital that day,

for he feared the impact such a life-altering operation would have on a

fiercely independent man like Senator

Stennis. But the President explained,

‘‘when I left, it was I who had been

strengthened.’’

He had been strengthened by the Senator’s confidence, his faith, and his optimism.

Those qualities defined Senator Stennis’ outlook on life. On his Senate desk

he kept a plaque that simply read:

‘‘Look Ahead.’’

‘‘That’s my philosophy,’’ he explained. Don’t waste time lamenting

the past. ‘‘You have got to look ahead.

I realize that life’s not altogether what

you make it. But that’s part of it, what

you make it yourself.’’

Senator Stennis made for himself a

wonderful life, and the Senate and the

country can be grateful for it.

When he retired from the Senate in

January 1989, Senate Majority Leader

ROBERT BYRD called it ‘‘the end of an

era.’’ And indeed it was.

Perhaps a greater compliment came

from a Republican Member of Congress

from Mississippi, who said, ‘‘We’ll miss

him. Even if he’s a Democrat, he’s a

great man.’’

As the Senate Democratic leader, I

say that is a great statement, even

from a Republican.

In 1988, Congress established the

John C. Stennis Center for Public Service Training at Mississippi State University. The center covers a range of

historical projects, including an excellent oral history program. When a congressional historian approached him

about an oral history of his own life

and career, Senator Stennis initially

opposed the idea, saying it would be

too self-aggrandizing. The historian

proceeded to explain that it was not

only an honor, it was his duty to record

for posterity his personal account of

the historic events and decisions in

which he had been involved.

‘‘Well, sir,’’ responded Senator Stennis, ‘‘If you say its my duty, then I

must do it, because I’ve always done

my duty.’’

Indeed he did.

It was not only his legislative accomplishments—and they were many—for

which we so loved and remember him,

it was also his commitment to God and

country.

No person who has ever served in the

U.S. Senate was ever quicker to tell

you what was wrong with this country.

But no person was ever quicker to tell

you what was right about it, either.

Mr. President, Linda and I extend our

most heartfelt condolences to the family of John C. Stennis: we share their

grief and their loss. But we also thank

them for sharing him with us, and I

thank the people of Mississippi for selecting him to serve in the Senate for

seven terms.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I first

SENATOR JOHN C. STENNIS

fwant to commend the distinguished

Democratic leader for his comments

about our departed colleague and my

good friend, Senator John C. Stennis.

Today, there was a very appropriate

editorial published in the ClarionLedger, in Jackson, MS, describing the

effect that Senator Stennis had, by virtue of his service in the Senate, on the

State of Mississippi.

I commend the editor for such a fine

article and I ask unanimous consent

that it be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the article

was ordered to be printed in the

RECORD, as follows:

[From the Clarion-Ledger, Apr. 25, 1995]

JOHN C. STENNIS: INTEGRITY SET STANDARD

FOR CONGRESS

The accomplishments of former U.S. Sen.

John C. Stennis could fill pages.

Stennis’ long and full life ended Sunday at

age 93, and during the next few days, Mississippians, will hear many of the senator’s

accomplishments recounted.

His long and distinguished career in government left his mark on many of the policies of the United States, especially in military matters. There are many institutions

that bear his name, even an aircraft carrier.

Mississippi is a much different place, and a

much better place, because of the policies

and economic development projects he

brought to the state.

But, all of the political achievements, the

things that most politicians are measured

by, fall short when it comes to Sen. Stennis.

Stennis was, above all else, a man of integrity, a true statesman, whose adherence to

honor and code of conduct made him legendary in the U.S. Senate, which he loved so

dearly.

That is indeed a rare quality, especially in

the mean-spirited politics of today.

Sen. Stennis’ reputation for fairness made

him a trusted colleague and confidant of

presidents of both parties. He was known as

the ‘‘conscience of the Senate’’ because of

his high ethical standards and respect for the

institution.

Throughout his long career, integrity and

service were watchwords. It is appropriate

that, of the institutions that bear his name,

the Stennis Center for Public Service at Mississippi State University seeks to encourage

young people to public service careers.

In his 1947 campaign, Stennis stated a simple creed: ‘‘I want to plow a straight furrow

right down to the end of my row.’’

Sen. John C. Stennis succeeded with that

pledge.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I want

to invite the attention of the Senate to

a couple of points that are made in this

fine tribute. After talking about many

of the things that Senator Stennis did

for the State the editorial writer then

says:

But, all of the political achievements, the

things that most politicians are measured

by, fall short when it comes to Senator Stennis.

Stennis was, above all else, a man of integrity, a true statesman, whose adherence to

honor and code of conduct made him legendary in the U.S. Senate, which he loved so

dearly.

Mr. President, as I was beginning to

think about putting this in the RECORD

for the information of Senators, I realized that I sit at the desk that was occupied by Senator Stennis during the

time he served in the Senate.

As you know, there is a tradition

here to put your name in the desk

drawer like schoolboys used to. Senator Stennis’ name is in this desk

drawer which he wrote in there and put

the date that he began service, 1947,

and a dash, and never did, of course,