May 4, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD— SENATE S6189 

Tanzania a step forward on the road to 

greater democracy and freedom. 

Since mid-1992, numerous opposition 

parties have been registered in Tanzania and multiparty elections have 

been held at local and the parliamentary by election levels. Yet, as of the 

results available at the end of 1994, new 

political parties won only 7 percent of 

the seats in contested elections. Half of 

the elections were uncontested. While 

the Constitution recognizes a multiparty system, the electoral policies and 

practices of Tanzania continue to support a single-party government. 

Clearly, a decision to hold multiparty elections does not mean that democracy, political rights and civil liberties have been fully embraced. Freedom House, a highly respected nonprofit organization that monitors political rights and civil liberties worldwide, rates Tanzania as not free. Likewise the Carter Center describes Tanzania as being moderately democratic, 

reflecting that while the Government 

of Tanzania makes formal commitments to a democratic transition, their 

deeds are not yet commensurate with 

their pledges. 

In October 1995, Tanzania will hold 

its first national multiparty election. 

This could be, given transparent and 

unbiased election practices, a major 

achievement in the political life of 

Tanzania. But now is the time for the 

Government of Tanzania to match the 

rhetoric of democracy with the tangible actions needed for real democracy 

to blossom and flourish. 

Constitutional adoption of multiparty elections has provided an opportunity for greater democracy. Freedom 

of the press, equal access to the public 

media—particularly the national 

radio—for all political parties, and a 

politically independent election commission will move democracy closer to 

a reality. Tanzania has made some 

progress in recent months. It can make 

significantly more in the months 

ahead. I encourage Tanzania’s leaders 

to move forward to provide a level 

playing field for all political parties for 

their upcoming national elections.

f 

∑ 

ORDERS FOR FRIDAY, MAY 5, 1995 

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, my understanding is that this request has been 

cleared with the Democratic leader, 

Senator DASCHLE. 

I ask unanimous consent that when 

the Senate completes its business 

today it stand in recess until the hour 

of 10 a.m. on Friday, May 5; that, following the prayer, the Journal of proceedings be deemed approved to date; 

that the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in day; and, 

that there then be a period for the 

transaction of morning business not to 

extend beyond the hour of 11 a.m. with 

Senators permitted to speak therein 

for up to 5 minutes each, except for the 

following: Senator DORGAN for 20 minutes. 

I further ask unanimous consent that 

at the hour of 11 a.m. the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 956, the 

product liability bill. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

f 

PROGRAM 

Mr. DOLE. For the information of all 

Senators, shortly after the Senate resumes consideration of the product liability bill on Friday, I hope to be able 

to lay down a new substitute amendment for discussion for the remainder 

of Friday’s session. A cloture motion 

will be filed on the substitute, and I 

hope we can reach an agreement for 

that cloture vote to occur at approximately 1:30 on Monday. 

f 

ORDER FOR RECESS UNTIL 

TOMORROW 

Mr. DOLE. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now 

ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess under the previous 

order following the remarks of Senator 

SPECTER, who I understand is on the 

way to the floor. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

Mr. DOLE. I suggest the absence of a 

quorum. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 

clerk will please call the roll. 

The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. 

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the 

quorum call be rescinded. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

f 

CLOTURE VOTE TO OCCUR AT 4 

P.M. ON MONDAY, MAY 8, 1995 

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, at the direction of the majority leader, in consultation with the minority, I would 

like to make one change in the leader’s 

earlier announcement. 

A cloture motion will be filed on the 

substitute, and the cloture vote will 

occur at approximately 4 p.m. on Monday, instead of 11:30. This is to accommodate the maximum number of Members for that vote. 

Under the prior arrangement, I believe Senator SPECTER will be recognized at this point for his remarks. 

I yield the floor, Mr. President. 

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum, Mr. 

President. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 

clerk will call the roll. 

The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. 

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask 

unanimous consent that the order for 

the quorum call be rescinded. 

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without 

objection, it is so ordered. 

f 

PRODUCT LIABILITY BILL 

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have 

sought recognition to make a few comments on the pending product liability 

bill and the cloture votes which were 

taken today; that is, the vote to close 

off debate so that there could be a vote 

on the bill ultimately on final passage, 

with the rules of our body having unlimited debate and the rules of our 

Senate requiring there be 60 Senators 

join on what is called cloture to close 

off debate, and we had two such votes 

today. One was 46 in favor, 53 against. 

The second was 47 in favor and 52 

against. So it is obvious on the current 

State of the record, the Senate is long 

away from having 60 votes to close off 

debate and move to a final decision on 

product liability. 

I think that when there are significant, really major, really fundamental 

changes to a system as profoundly important as the legal system in the 

United States, that it is a matter that 

requires very, very careful deliberation, and it is appropriate for the cloture route to be followed and for 60 

votes to be required to pass legislation 

of this importance, of this far-reaching 

nature. 

Mr. President, I have stated on the 

floor of the Senate on a number of occasions that I believe that reforms are 

warranted on product liability, but I 

think they have to be very, very carefully crafted. I believe that after experience representing both plaintiffs and 

defendants in litigation and having had 

substantial experience in products liability litigation. 

The matter came up in the last Congress, and I voted for cloture at that 

time in the hopes that we could get a 

carefully crafted bill. I think that it is 

appropriate to have a bill which would 

provide for alternative dispute resolution, as is provided in the current legislation, to adopt the collateral source 

rule which is contested. But it provides 

that if an individual has bought insurance and has collected on his or her 

own insurance policy, then that individual cannot collect again in a lawsuit. The plaintiffs and the individuals 

and the consumers objected to collateral source rule on the ground that the 

individual has paid for it so that whatever benefit is received from the insurance policy ought not to be discounted 

for the defendant. But I think that on 

balance, given all the factors, that it is 

appropriate to limit that aspect of a 

plaintiff’s recovery. 

I believe that it is worthwhile to 

have a tightening of the rules on frivolous lawsuits, and perhaps the frivolous 

lawsuit is really at the core of the litigation problem in America today, lawsuits which are brought without any 

real merit or without any real foundation. 

I think that if we could set the rules 

to discourage, to eliminate frivolous 

lawsuits, we would have really solved 

most of the problem that is present in 

the litigation system today, to stop 

lawsuits which are being brought 

mmaher on MIKETEMP with SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS