S7608 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 26, 1995

[From the Washington Post, May 23, 1995]

A CONFLICT OF WILL’S?—PUNDIT KEPT QUIET

ABOUT WIFE’S ROLE AS LOBBYIST

(By Howard Kurtz)

In his syndicated column Friday, George F.

Will assailed the Clinton administration’s

proposed tariffs on Japanese luxury cars,

calling them ‘‘trade-annihilating tariffs to

coerce another government into coercing its

automobile industry.’’

He repeated his criticism Sunday on ABC’s

‘‘This Week With David Brinkley,’’ calling

the 100 percent tariffs ‘‘illegal’’ and ‘‘a subsidy for Mercedes dealerships.’’

What Will did not mention is that his wife,

Mari Maseng Will, is a registered foreign

agent for the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association. Her firm, Maseng Communications, was paid $198,721 last year to lobby

for the industry.

Will dismissed any suggestion of a conflict.

‘‘I was for free trade long before I met my

wife. End of discussion,’’ he said yesterday.

‘‘There are people in Washington whose entire life consists of raising questions. To me,

it’s beyond boring. I don’t understand the

whole mentality.

‘‘What’s to disclose? What would I say?

That one of my wife’s clients agrees with my

long-standing views on free trade? Good

God,’’ he said.

But several newspaper editors said Will

should have disclosed his wife’s paid lobbying. ‘‘I’m very distressed,’’ said Dennis A.

Britton, editor of the Chicago Sun-Times.

‘‘That’s one of those material facts an editor

should know before placing a story in the

paper. That’s like a financial writer having a

stake in a company he’s writing about.’’

Will did disclose on the Brinkley show last

month that his wife was advising Sen. Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) in his presidential campaign and would become the campaign’s

communications director. Will, who mentioned this before questioning Dole, said he

did so only ‘‘because ABC asked me to.’’ He

said his wife’s role would not inhibit him in

commenting on the Dole campaign.

Will is probably the nation’s most prominent conservative writer. He appears on the

Brinkley show, opines in Newsweek and

writes a newspaper column that is syndicated to 475 papers by The Washington

Post Writers Group. Maseng served as White

House communications director and assistant secretary of transportation during the

Reagan administration. The two were married in 1991.

The Washington Post was initially told of

Maseng’s lobbying by a Clinton administration staffer. The administration has been

trying to deflect criticism that the tariffs

would hurt American consumers and some

car dealers. Will wrote that the 13 models of

Japanese cars would be ‘‘unsalable in the

land of the free and the home of the brave.’’

According to Maseng’s Justice Department

filings, her firm is paid $200 an hour to deal

with reporters, follow legislation, place advertising, issue press releases and draft op-ed

pieces with such titles as ‘‘Selling Cars in

Japan: It Isn’t About Access’’ and ‘‘Fixing

the Outcome of Trade With Japan Is a Dangerous Way to Do Business.’’ The firm also

sought to arrange for the industry’s top

Washington lobbyist to meet the Chicago

Tribune editorial board, tried to place an

opinion piece in the Washington Times and

drafted letters to the New York Times and

Detroit Free Press.

Maseng Communications began representing the Japanese in 1992 and was paid $47,422

the following year. Maseng did not respond

to a request for comment.

‘‘What Maseng provides is the strategic

public affairs direction for the communications program,’’ said Charles Powers, a senior vice president at Porter/Novelli, another

Washington public relations firm that works

for the automakers in partnership with

Maseng’s company.

Stephen Isaacs, associate dean of Columbia

University’s journalism school, said a

spouse’s employment ‘‘does matter. The

same kind of conflict questions that apply to

us also apply to our extended families. He

made a mistake. . . . The fact that he

doesn’t see a problem shows he just doesn’t

get it.’’

Isaacs also cited a 1980 incident in which

Will helped Ronald Reagan prepare for a

presidential campaign debate and then

praised Reagan’s performance on television

without disclosing his own role.

As for last week’s column, some editorial

page editors also expressed concern. ‘‘I would

have preferred to have known in advance,’’

said Brent Larkin, editorial director of the

Cleveland Plain Dealer.

Dorrance Smith, executive producer of

‘‘This Week With David Brinkley,’’ said he

was not aware of the connection. He said he

had urged Will to disclose his wife’s employment with Dole, but that a round-table discussion is ‘‘a different context’’ from interviewing a senator.

‘‘I’m not sure where you draw the line,’’

Smith said. ‘‘I don’t know who Cokie Roberts’s brother’s clients are.’’ Roberts, another Brinkley panelist, is the sister of

Washington lobbyist Tommy Boggs.

Alan Shearer, general manager of The

Washington Post Writers Group, said he saw

no evidence that Maseng’s employment ‘‘has

affected George’s judgment. . . . A lot of us

have spouses who have careers of their own,

and whether that requires us to disclose everything they do is a difficult question. It

doesn’t bother me.’’

Will, for his part, doesn’t see what the fuss

is about. He says he has never discussed the

issue with his wife.

‘‘My views on free trade are well known

and antecedent to Mari’s involvement with

whatever the client is,’’ Will said. ‘‘It’s just

too silly.’’

Mr. DOLE addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

COMPREHENSIVE TERRORISM

PREVENTION ACT

fThe Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.

ORDER OF PROCEDURE

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, it seems

rather obvious we are not going to be

able to complete action on the

antiterrorism bill, S. 735. I have been

notified that there are at least probably 60 or more amendments to a bill

that we thought the President requested and that we wanted to cooperate with the President to try to get to

him, as I indicated, before the Memorial Day recess.

But, in view of the 50-some votes we

had on the budget, we lost a day, and in

view of the list of amendments, even

though there may be a number of

amendments which may not be offered,

it is now very clear that we cannot

complete action on this bill today. I

think the next best thing is to try to

get some agreement to at least limit

the number of amendments.

I do not know how you can have

many more than 60, but I assume staff

listening in could probably get it up to

90 in 20 minutes if they really tried.

But I would just say to the President

and particularly the people of Oklahoma, those who have suffered the

tragedy, that we are serious about this

legislation. I am not certain whether

we can finish on the Monday we are

back. I do not want to delay telecommunications. We have promised

and promised both Senator PRESSLER

and Senator HOLLINGS we would address that very important issue. So I

will have to decide what course of action to pursue.

I know the House has not acted on

this, so even if we did complete action

today, we could not get the bill to the

President until after the Memorial Day

recess.

And having discussed this with the

Democratic leader, I think many of

these amendments on both lists are

just—there are some that say ‘‘relevant.’’ We do not have any idea what

it is or even what it is relevant to. But

it is relevant as far as not being able to

finish the bill if everybody intends to

offer their amendments. One Member

has 10 amendments; another on our

side has 7, or whatever.

So I am going to ask consent that we

enter into some agreement that we

limit the number of amendments to

those that have been identified, if that

is satisfactory with the Democratic

leader.

Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

Democratic leader.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, like

the majority leader, I also would like

to be able to accommodate the schedule to move this legislation as quickly

as we can. We need to send a clear message, not only to the people of Oklahoma, but others as well, that this is

important.

As the majority leader knows, we

just received a copy of the draft last

night. As I understand it, it has not yet

been printed in the RECORD. We will be

taking a closer look at it.

I think, in spite of the fact that there

may be some questions relating to the

draft itself, we would be willing to

enter into an agreement on the list of

amendments so we can work through

them. There are a lot of amendments

there that may or may not be offered,

but I think it does protect Senators

since they have not had the opportunity to look at it more carefully.

Certainly, over the course of the next

several days, everyone will do that.

But we want to expedite our progress

on this and, hopefully, in the not-toodistant future, we can resolve what

outstanding differences remain and

come to a point where we can vote on

final passage.

UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I hope we

can obtain a consent agreement and

the managers of the bill can stay here.

There may be amendments on each side

that can be taken, indicating we are

making an effort to move forward, even

though we have only had one vote
May 26, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S7609

today and opening statements yesterday. That, I think, will be helpful if we

can take a few minutes on each side.

I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be the only firstdegree amendments in order; that they

be subject to relevant second degrees

after a failed motion to table, with the

exception of the amendments described

only as ‘‘relevant,’’ and they be subject

to relevant second degrees prior to any

motion to table; and that the amendments be limited to the following time

agreements where designated, to be

equally divided in the usual form.

I just suggest, if there is no objection, I understand they are working on

a final draft of amendments on that

side. I think we have a final draft. I

will not read each of the amendments

and the sponsors, but I ask unanimous

consent that the amendments on the

Democratic list be printed in the

RECORD, as well as those on the Republican list.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there

objection?

Mr. EXON. Reserving the right to object, and I shall not, but in the spirit of

trying to help the two leaders, especially on this type of legislation, obviously with the rights of every Senator

that are well known and abound and

are used more than infrequently, on

legislation like this I think it possibly

would be wise to at least consider a set

number of amendments and then seek a

unanimous-consent agreement that the

Republican leader and the Democratic

leader—depending on how many they

want—would ask to be the final authority on what amendments and in

what order are offered on something I

think as critically important as this

piece of legislation.

If we had not had the 50-hour time

limit on the budget resolution, obviously we would have been here this

weekend and through next Wednesday.

I was one who had to wrestle with it.

I guess somewhere along the line we

have to appeal to all the Members with

the idea of moving things—not in all

cases—but in cases like this, maybe we

could have some kind of appeal to have

the leaders say how many amendments

will be called up and in what order and

the others would not be in order.

Mr. DOLE. I thank the Senator from

Nebraska. I hope we will be able to do

that indirectly, maybe working with

the managers. I think many of these

amendments will not be called up.

Many are acceptable, many are improvements on the bill. Some are going

to be debated.

I do not see any partisan effort on

this legislation. I think it is a question

of trying to find how do we get a good

bill, how do we protect constitutional

rights down the road. I am hopeful we

can do that rather quickly once we get

all these in a net here. I can see they

are growing as we speak, and as fast as

they can write, amendments are being

added to the list. So I hope quickly we

can stop the bleeding.

Mr. BIDEN addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there

objection to the majority leader’s request?

Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, if the Republican leader will yield for a moment, reserving the right to object. I

am confident the reason why the list is

growing is because no one has seen the

bill. It has not been printed in the

RECORD. There have been several of us

who have seen the bill. Our colleagues

have not seen the bill. Their staffs have

not seen the bill.

So I am absolutely confident that a

significant portion of the amendments

that are being added are being added in

the blind. They just want to make sure

that the bill does not do what it is rumored to do in the press.

I think this is one of those cases

where we should not spend a whole lot

more time trying to narrow it. If we

can get a list now, great, do it, but I

am confident that the Senator from

Utah and I, over the period of the remainder of the day and during the recess, will be able to go a long way to

narrowing down that list as our colleagues get a chance and their staffs

get a chance to read this bill, which is

not in the RECORD yet.

We always spend time weighing bills

around here. This is a 150-page bill that

no one has seen other than me, and I

have not read it yet. I got it at 6

o’clock last night. I am not being critical of anyone, but that is just by way

of explanation.

I do not think amendments being

added are added for any other reason

than to protect some issue Members

are concerned about in this legislation.

I beg your pardon, it is in the

RECORD. I stand corrected, it is in the

RECORD as of last night. Based on the

last vote, 15 to 20 people are gone. That

is the only point I make. I am sure we

can work that through.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there

objection to the request? Without objection, it is so ordered.

The list of the amendments is as follows:

AMENDMENTS TO TERRORISM BILL

REPUBLICAN AMENDMENTS

Kyl: Habeas corpus.

Hatch: Technical.

Gramm:

(1) Sentencing

(2) Relevant

Abraham: Alien terrorist removal.

Pressler: Federal building.

Pressler: False identification of documents.

Smith: Technical.

Craig: Relevant.

Craig: Relevant.

Craig: Mandatory minimums.

Brown: Sanctions on terrorist countries.

Brown: Relevant.

Specter: Secret proceedings/deportation.

Specter: Attorney generals classification

of terrorist organizations.

Specter: Wiretap.

Specter: Habeas corpus exhaustion of remedies.

Specter: Habeas corpus/full and fair determination.

Specter: Habeas corpus.

Specter: Relevant.

Dole: Relevant.

Dole: Relevant.

Coverdell: I.D. cards.

Helms: International terrorism.

Helms: International terrorism.

Helms: International terrorism.

Hatch: Relevant.

Hatch: Relevant.

Cohen: Posse comitatus.

Ashcroft: Citizen rights.

Kempthouse: Relevant.

Warner: Relevant.

DEMOCRATIC AMENDMENTS

Biden:

1. Habeas corpus.

2. Habeas corpus.

3. Relevant.

4. Relevant.

5. Technical.

6. Firearms enforcement.

7. Foreign sovereign immunity.

8. Aliens.

Boxer:

1. Criminal proceedings.

2. Para-military activities.

Bradley: Cop killer bullets.

Bryan:

1. Immigration.

2. Immigration.

Daschle:

1. Relevant.

2. Relevant.

Feingold:

1. Relevant.

2. Relevant.

Feinstein:

1. Relevant.

2. Relevant.

3. Taggants.

4. Distribution bomb making materials.

Glenn: Relevant.

Graham: Habeas corpus.

Harkin:

1. Relevant.

2. Relevant.

3. Relevant.

4. Relevant.

Heflin:

1. Relevant.

2. ATF study w/Shelby.

Hollings: Funds telephony.

Kennedy:

1. Immigration/use secret evidence.

2. Immigration/use secret evidence.

3. Crime: multiple gun purchase.

4. Crime: assist local law enforcement.

5. Immigration/judicial review deportation.

6. Habeas corpus.

Kerrey: Funds for ATF/Secret Service.

Kerry:

1. Relevant.

2. Relevant.

Kohl: Gun free school zone.

Lautenberg:

1. Civilian marksmanship.

2. Felon-gun-explosive purchasing.

3. Relevant.

Leahy:

1. Crime victims.

2. Digital telephony.

3. Relevant.

4. Foreign policy.

Levin:

1. Relevant.

2. Relevant.

3. Relevant.

4. Relevant.

5. Relevant.

Lieberman: Wiretap.

Moynihan: Ammunition regulation.

Nunn:

1. Military assistance.

2. Military assistance.

3. Lying to federal officials.

Simon:

1. Gun dealers.

2. Fundraising.
S7610 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 26, 1995

3. Secret evidence.

4. Relevant.

5. Relevant.

6. Relevant.

7. Relevant.

8. Relevant.

Wellstone:

1. Relevant.

2. Relevant.

Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me indicate, I think I count 89 or 90 amendments—they went up 30 as I was getting ready here. Obviously, they will

not all be offered. If they will, I just

will not bring the bill back up again.

I further ask unanimous consent that

no assault weapons amendments be in

order to the terrorism bill, and that

following the disposition of the abovelisted amendments, the Hatch substitute be agreed to. That is as far as

we can go, I think, at this point.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there

objection? Without objection, it is so

ordered.

Mr. DOLE. I thank my friend, the

Democratic leader, and the manager of

the bill. I hope maybe in the course of

the next hour or two, they may be able

to dispose of 30 or 40 of these amendments.

Mr. BIDEN. Fifty or sixty, Mr. President, I am sure we could, if we work

extra hard.

Mr. DASCHLE addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

Democratic leader.

Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask

the majority leader if he can give us

some indication as to the schedule for

the remainder of the day and perhaps

on Monday when we return.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Mr. DOLE. There will be no more

votes today, and on Monday, June 5, I

suggest, I hope there will be votes, but

any votes ordered not occur prior to 5

p.m., so some Members coming from a

distance will be able to be here if they

leave their homes early Monday morning.

At that point—and I will advise the

Democratic leader hopefully this afternoon—maybe we will move to the telecommunications bill or stay on this

bill, and much will depend on whether

or not the managers believe we can finish this bill rather quickly, say, by

Tuesday afternoon. Then we can still

go on the telecommunications bill for

the remainder of the week.

Mr. DASCHLE. I thank the majority

leader.

Mr. DOLE. I suggest the absence of a

quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

clerk will call the roll.

The bill clerk proceeded to call the

roll.

Mr. DOLE. 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. DOLE. Mr. President, I think we

have just concluded that it would be a

better procedure if we would give the

managers, starting today, an opportunity to go through these amendments. Some they may be prepared to

take, but they have not been fully reviewed; some have not been fully drafted, but they have the concept. We have

to see the exact language.

The leadership of both sides suggest

that we start that process today and,

in the meantime, I am going to suggest

that we now have a period for the

transaction of routine morning business, with Senators permitted to speak

for not more than 5 minutes each.

Mr. HATCH. Before the leader does

that, I want to say I think the majority leader is right. We are going to get

our staffs together and sift through the

amendments and see which ones we can

agree on and dispose of quickly. Hopefully, we will get that done.

Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, ‘‘Justice

delayed is justice denied,’’ so writes

Montana State Senator Ethel Harding

of Polson. On January 21, 1974, Senator

Harding’s daughter, Lana, was brutally

murdered. It was not until just 2 weeks

ago, over 21 years later, that justice

was finally carried out and Lana’s murderer was executed by the State of

Montana.

This tragedy has haunted Senator

Harding and her family for far too

many years. The unfortunate thing is

that the Harding family is not alone.

And so it is encouraging to see the

Senate act upon true habeas corpus reform as part of the overall Comprehensive Terrorism Prevention Act of 1995.

I cannot agree with some of my colleagues who would suggest that habeas

corpus reform should not be a part of

this legislation. No one, including the

families of the 167 innocent people

killed in the Oklahoma City bombing,

should have to wait as long as the Harding family to see that justice is carried out.

Habeas corpus reform is long overdue

in my opinion and the quicker we can

bring about change in this area of the

law the better. I appreciate the efforts

of Montana’s attorney general, Joe

Mazurek, who along with 11 other attorneys general from around the country wrote to the President in support of

habeas corpus reform. This is not a

partisan issue and should not get

bogged down in partisan politics.

In addition, I am encouraged that

Senators DOLE and HATCH have taken

great pains to ensure that this legislation reaffirms our longstanding commitment to constitutional protections,

and that any provision of the act which

is held unconstitutional, will be severed from the act and will not affect

the remaining provisions.

I am also pleased to see that we have

not weakened the prohibition on the

use of the U.S. Armed Forces for domestic police purposes and that we

have not expanded the authority of

roving wiretaps by removing the requirement of intent.

In the wake of this great national

tragedy, it is critical that we unite behind our law enforcement personnel.

From the local, to the State, to the

Federal authorities, law enforcement

and public service personnel should be

commended for the fine work they have

done thus far.

At the same time, it is important

that we do not overreact out of fear or

heightened emotions. In Montana, we

continue to have situations in which

individuals feel threatened by an imposing, uncaring, and overwhelming

Federal Government and bureaucracy.

As a result, some individuals have been

driven to illegal acts such as a variety

of Federal and felony charges, including gun violations, threatening and impersonating public officials, and tax

evasion.

Such actions cannot be condoned for

we are a civilized nation of laws. The

Montana law enforcement community

has responded cautiously but appropriately to these situations. They have

taken a nonconfrontational approach,

responding swiftly and firmly to any

activities that have resulted in a violation of the law. And they have done so

without jeopardizing human lives.

If we can help our local law enforcement community detect and prevent

future violations of the law by providing our law enforcement community

with the resources to effectively carry

out their responsibilities, we should do

so. This legislation is a reasoned, balanced approach in that regard.

MORNING BUSINESS

fMr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we now have a period for the transaction of morning

business, with Senators permitted to

speak for 5 minutes each.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there

objection to the request?

WAS CONGRESS IRRESPONSIBLE?

Without objection, it is so ordered.

THE VOTERS HAVE SAID YES

fMr. HELMS. Mr. President, as of the

close of business yesterday, Thursday,

May 25, the Federal debt stood at

$4,891,247,403,074.28. On a per capita

basis, every man, woman, and child in

America owes $18,567.26 as his or her

share of that debt.

EXPLANATION OF ABSENCE

fMr. FORD. Mr. President, the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. FEINGOLD]

has asked me to inform his colleagues

that he is necessarily absent today in

order to attend the funeral of former

Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin, who

represented the State of Wisconsin for

22 years. The funeral is taking place

today in the Gesu Chapel at Marquette

University where Secretary Aspin

taught before his election to Congress.

Some 20 current and former Members

of the House and Senate are expected

to attend the services along with Vice

President GORE.