Over the last several months, extending back to before last November’s congressional elections, I was talking to Senator Hatch and the Senate leadership about organizational issues for this Senate. I am heartened that Senator Lott and Senator Daschle incorporated my suggestion to return to the days when Senators from both parties preside over the Senate for brief periods in the absence of the President of the Senate. I think that has been a good change from the days in which only Senators from the majority party presided. In a Senate that has 50 Democrats and 50 Republicans it is the right thing to do.

Likewise, I was supportive of Senator Daschle’s efforts which culminated in S. Res. 8, the organizing resolution of the Senate that was unanimously adopted more than seven weeks ago. In accordance with that Senate Resolution, this Committee is now comprised equally of members of both parties. Consistent with that Senate Resolution "the budgets and office space" for this Committee should be "equal" for this Congress. They have not been and are not yet "equal". Through January and now late into February, we have not reached agreement on a reallocation of office space or the Committee budget to implement the agreement of the Senate.

Almost three weeks after the Senate reached the historic agreement embodied in S. Res. 8, on January 24, this Committee had its initial business meeting and I suggested that we promptly organize the Committee. I had already suggested rules changes to Senator Hatch and hoped to be "in position to complete our organization into Subcommittees, assign Subcommittee Chairman and Ranking Democratic Members and complete the process of reallocating the resources of the Committee in accordance with Senate Resolution 8 without additional delay."

The following week, on January 30, I again suggested that we get about the business of organizing the Committee. So as not to delay Senate consideration of the nomination of the Attorney General, Democrats cooperated in considering that nomination at that time and then promptly before the Senate. I again urged that we turn our attention to reorganizing the Committee and reallocating our resources in accordance with S. Res. 8.

This Committee did not meet again for two weeks and when we did the Committee was not prepared to make progress on any of the organizational matters that require our attention before March 1. I noted at that meeting on February 15, my frustration and concern that we had not resolved these preliminary matters in accordance with S. Res. 8. Senator Hatch could not be with us that day. I noted, again, that since the Senate’s unanimous adoption of S. Res. 8 in early January and the setting of our Committee membership later that month, we have had discussions, but have yet to reach agreement on a number of fundamental organizational matters. I had proposed rule changes back in January and have been urging that we maintain seven subcommittees as we had last Congress. We have not reached agreement on the reallocation of the Committee space in accordance with the Senate’s instructions in S. Res. 8 that it be divided equally. I had hoped that and our budget issues would have been resolved by now. As I feared, we are now staring the March 1 deadline in the face.

Our agenda today fails to include the organizational issues that require our immediate attention. I will endeavor to work with Senator Hatch and all Members of the Committee through the day to see if we cannot make progress and conclude our agreements tomorrow. I understand that Senator Hatch’s staff made a proposal just before noon today and want to review that and see whether any parts of it may be acceptable or provide a framework for finally making progress. I hope so.

I am endeavoring to make progress on these organizational issues without having our lack of progress interfere with our consideration of amendments to bankruptcy legislation. As I noted two weeks ago, our markups have in the past been very productive and improved the measure before us. In the last Congress, the Committee marked up the bankruptcy bill, S.625, over a three-day period. Seventeen amendments were offered, eight with Republican lead sponsors and nine with Democratic. Of those 17 amendments, the Committee passed 9, six had Republican lead sponsors and three had Democratic.

I submit that when this Committee does its work and considers important legislation, even complicated legislation like that affecting our bankruptcy laws, it can improve the bill. I think we did that in the 105th Congress and again in the 106th Congress. I think that we can do that again this year. I know that many Members of the Committee have been working on amendments. I look forward to this being a fair and open process. Somehow we must now simultaneously resolve the organizational issues regarding this Committee. We need to come together to establish subcommittees, reapprove our rules, reallocate space, reallocate other resources and agree upon a budget.

Today we will resume discussion of our bankruptcy laws. I am glad that we now have the answers to questions from the hearing from most of the witnesses, some of which were received last night. I understand that Judge Becker still needs to get back to us in response to questions but I have not asked that the Committee delay action until the record is complete in that regard. Indeed, I have offered to work with Judge Becker and Senator Specter to try to accommodate the concerns of judges with certain language that has been incorporated into the bill regarding direct appeals of bankruptcy rulings.

For that matter, at our last meeting it was Democrats who came to make the quorum and debate the bill. I was particularly offended that Senator Hatch’s spokesperson described our actions as being "obstructionist" and to read that Senator Lott said that Democrats were engaged in delaying for delay’s sake, when it was Democrats who were proceeding with debate at our last meeting and all the Republicans– except Chairman Grassley left– and it was Senator Grassley who held the bill over.

As we begin today, we have Members who were not accorded the courtesy of an opening statement at our hearing or at our earlier meeting and who, I understand, would like an opportunity to speak to the bill. For my part, I have come today having circulated possible amendments last week and prepared to proceed to offer those amendments and improve the bill. I want to commend the Democrats on the Committee who have likewise circulated amendments over the last several days and who likewise are working to improve the bill. I note that Senator Hatch has also circulated amendments, including one that was circulated as recently as 11:30 this morning. I look forward to working with all Members of the Committee as the Committee on this important matter.

####