Department of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004 - Part Six

Because unionism was new in Nevada, and this type of labor unrest was fresh in the western states, the union representatives were continually trying to justify their ability to sustain a long strike. When the owners, in effect, refused to negotiate, the union announced that it had ample funds to support the union miners for an indefinite period of time. The company responded by announcing a policy inviting nonunion men to apply for jobs.

As the contention continued, so did the competition for the most marketable story describing the strike. Since the Searchlight was published in Searchlight and was the paper closet to the controversy, it seemed always to paint a picture of peace and serenity during this time, wanting only to project the image of a boomtown. The DeLamar Lode was the newspaper in the town of Delamar, located in what was then the upper part of Lincoln County, about 30 miles from Caliente and 150 miles from Searchlight. On August 4, only two months after the beginning of the dispute, the Lode opined that only the bad people in the county were left in Searchlight. The Lyon County Times, published in Yerington, about 350 miles north of Searchlight, reported that the miners at the Quartette struck to have their workday reduced from twelve hours to eight. Such a report was ridiculous; at no time in Searchlight's brief history had the miners been required to work more than nine hours. The Searchlight wrote a rare scathing editorial, attacking those who engaged in perpetuating false rumors and emphasizing that the strike was being conducted in a peaceful, orderly manner, on issues that were strictly a matter of principle.

On July 3, 1903, Judge M.A. Murphy of the state district court struck down the law establishing the eight-hour day in mining-related work, ruling it unconstitutional. The court declared that the legislation, being class in nature, was invalid because it separated mining and milling from other types of employment, violating the state constitution by taking property without due process. In effect, the court ruled that the Nevada Legislature had no right to dictate hours to miners and mill workers when it did not set the same standards for other types of work. Because of this, the owners were being forced to work their property under conditions that unfairly paralyzed them by having their employees work fewer hours than other workers.

Immediately thereafter, the union, through John Williams, a vice president, approved the strike despite the court's interpretation of the recently passed law. The union again declared its ability to withstand a long strike, since the WFM had supplied the funding necessary for the duration of the union activities.

Even though the owners and managers were not often in the vicinity of Searchlight, they had obviously been plotting to ruin the union and end the strike. Their first move was to form the Desert Mine Operators Association. Although the association's bylaws prohibited discrimination against union members, everyone knew that the purpose of the organization was to stamp out the union. The association even included mines in California, as well as Searchlight's Quartette, Duplex, Good Hope, New Era, Cyrus Noble, Southern Nevada, and Ranioler. The formation of this association was the beginning of the end of the effectiveness of the labor movement in Searchlight. The owners began to investigate ways to reopen the mines with or without the union miners.

The commercial interests in town formed a citizens' committee to arrange a conference with the owners and the union and to act as a liaison, carrying messages of hope between the two warring parties. The Quartette officials, representing all the other companies, refused to talk to the union but professed a willingness to resume operations and to take back all former employees-with the same wages and hours that were in effect before the strike. Company officials also indicated that when the mines began making a profit again they would entertain a different wage scale. This decision by the owners meant that underground workers, as well as blacksmiths and engineers (who were traditionally treated like miners), would work eight hours and aboveground men would work nine hours. All others, such as laborers and those on temporary jobs, would work nine-hour shifts. The union rejected that offer, holding out for a fifty-cent raise and an eight-hour day for all mine-related work.

It didn't take long for businesses to start feeling the effects of the mines' closure. Though there was significant independent prospecting being conducted during the labor unrest, it generated very little commercial trade.

The first strikebreakers, two miners from Los Angeles, arrived in September. They didn't stay long, since they were persuaded by the union not to go to work. Several days later, two stagecoaches arrived with men who were to begin work at the Quartette. The Searchlight of September 25 reported that the Quartette had gone back into operation with thirty-five men on its payroll, including miners and guards. Even though this is a small number of employees, the company's action demonstrated its determination to get the valuable property back into production. Conversely, the union was doing everything it could to prevent the mine from adding employees, even stationing pickets at various locations, like Manvel, Ibex, Needles, Goffs, and San Bernardino, to deter the further importation of strikebreakers and other anti-union activities. The union also appealed to other labor organizations in Los Angeles and San Francisco, urging them to make every effort to keep workers from coming to Searchlight until the strike was settled, and it advertised in the Joplin, Missouri, area-the home base of the union-to warn hirelings of the situation in Searchlight.

By early October, however, the Quartette had started a stamp mill, located next to the mine. It was obvious to all that for the mill to operate the mine had to be producing ore. Nevertheless, the union still talked as if it was winning the dispute, even though it was apparent that the mine was operating with nonunion workers.

One incident that added to the excitement during these tense times was when the union learned that thirty strikebreakers were en route by train to Manvel, on their way to the Searchlight mines. The union organized a march along the twenty-three miles from Searchlight to Manvel to intercept them. After the long, grueling walk, however, they learned that not a single strikebreaker was on the train.

The editorial position of the Searchlight took its first turn against the union on October 2, noting that the union was hurting its own cause by not working harder to resolve the dispute. Recognizing that nonunion men were already being shipped in to work, the editor further elaborated that the new law, on the basis of which the strike had been called, had since been declared illegal. The article made the case that the two sides were crushing the life out of the new town of Searchlight and stated that the business of the town was being ruined and the storekeepers forced to operate at a loss. This was the first editorial calling for an end to the strike.

Just a week after this editorial appeared, the Quartette, the Good Hope, and the Southern Nevada mines were back to full operation. Simultaneously, the union suffered several other setbacks, including the arrival of twenty-one workers from Joplin, Missouri, and several more from the mines of Colorado. The strikebreakers went to work under the conditions that had existed before the strike began.

About this time, the Quartette opened its own general store and even built bunkhouses for its workers, which provoked extremely negative reactions from both the merchants and the general population. The Quartette, located about a mile and a half from the center of the city, was becoming its own town.

The Searchlight condemned the actions of the mine owners. They were particularly galling to the paper because it had recently run editorials supporting these companies. In desperation the paper called on the union to end the strike, but the union remained defiant. The newspaper finally declared that the union had lost the goodwill and sympathy of the community.

Even at its most intense, however, the strike in Searchlight was orderly and nonviolent. The sheriff from the county seat of Pioche periodically visited Searchlight to monitor the situation, always returning with reports of nothing more than rumors of disturbances. The entire period of the strike was unusually calm.

The peaceful nature of the Searchlight strike was similar to the minimal labor strife that the Comstock has experienced a generation earlier. The Western Federation of Miners formed its first union in southern Nevada in Tonopah in the summer of 1901, and Tonopah escaped any real labor problems until after World War I.

At nearby Goldfield, however, there were significant labor disputes, marked by numerous episodes of violence. The unions had obviously learned from the losses of the wfm in Searchlight, for they became powerful in Tonopah and Goldfield. In 1907 Goldfield was an armed camp. Several shootings occurred, with one reported death. Eventually President Theodore Roosevelt, at Governor John Spark's request, sent federal troops to quell the quarreling factions. In comparison, Searchlight had been very calm.

In January 1904 the courts again surprised the entire Nevada mining community with a long overdue decision. The Nevada
Supreme Court overruled the district court and declared the wages-and-hours law constitutional. The reason for the strike had come full circle. But like its predecessor, this final decision did not change the fact that the union had been broken. The union continued operating in a strike mode for the next year, even though almost all of the union men had gone back to work. Those who returned to the mines were required to sign a card agreeing not to participate in union activities, pursuant to the Desert Mine Operators Association rules.

In 1907 the same card system was put into a place in Goldfield just before Roosevelt ordered federal troops to Esmeralda County. The right of the companies to have employees sign such a card was affirmed by the Nevada state legislature in 1907.

The strike had a tremendous impact on the new town. The merchants suffered in not being able to develop commercial enterprises as quickly as they otherwise could have. Many people experienced economic hardship as a result of the strike, and workers with known union sympathies were laid off. For example, James Lappin, foreman of the Quartette Mine, was laid off as a result of his union leanings. His wife, Lula, opened an ice cream parlor to provide income for the family, but the store failed and the Lappins migrated to Southern California where, at age fifty, James began a second career as a farmer. He died in Anaheim, in 1908, at age fifty-five, just about five years after being run out of Searchlight. James Lappin's story was repeated numerous times in the lives of the early inhabitants of this boomtown.

The labor-management problem in early Searchlight had a very limited effect, however, setting the progress of the town back for only about three months. Though the union and townspeople kept referring to the "strike," in reality it didn't exist-the strike was actually broken early in the dispute.

As mentioned above, much of the friction was caused by the competing newspapers, the DeLamar Lode and the Searchlight. The Lode, for example, had the strike settled by September 20 when it reported: "The backbone of the strike is broken. The Quartette landed a number of men on its property yesterday to begin work and to date things were moving as of old." The Searchlight was more cautious. In its October 2 issue, it reported: "The strike situation that past week has shown little change."

The strike did have other, unintended consequences, however. It was because of the pro-union stance taken by the Searchlight and some of its advertisers that the Quartette Company decided to start its own general store and other competing businesses at the mine site. The action was clearly an attempt to punish those businesses that went along with the union leaders.

The dispute also caused the company to focus on labor relations instead of on ways to improve the mine. One of the Quartette's managers said in December 1903 that if the strike had not occurred the company would have built a railroad from Ibex to the camp.

In just three short months, the union was vanquished. Though the exact date of the defeat is debatable, the conclusion is not. Union activity disappeared and to this day has never reappeared in Searchlight.

Mr. President, that is the end of chapter 5.

I got a call. The cloakroom called. I have a note that one woman from Frederick, MD, called. She likes the book. She called Barnes & Noble who said it would take 2 weeks to get a copy. She said it would be good if I would speak more slowly so she can hear and understand the book.

I don't think I can do that. I don't speak very fast to begin with. I appreciate her being interested, though. You can get it at Barnes & Noble. If she came to Searchlight, she could buy one right there.

As I said, Searchlight was part of the busiest two-lane road in all of Nevada. But we have been able to get four lanes there now, half the way. That helped a lot. They opened it a couple of weeks ago. It is not hard to go to Searchlight. Lots of people go there. As I indicated earlier, we have a great new McDonald's there. We had a store there that was opened by a woman who was a fantastic artist. That young woman died at an early age, about a month ago. That closed that operation. But there is kind of a curio shop there. They would call it an antique shop here. They have old mining equipment and things of that nature. We have a nice restaurant and casino there. A long-time friend of mine added to inflation a lot about a year ago. For many years she advertised a nickel cup of coffee. She raised that to a dime. So now in Searchlight, you can drive through there and get a cup of coffee for a dime. You don't have to get anything else. I don't know how many people it draws, but she has a dime cup of coffee.

She hired a new chef. She had one many years ago named Bill. He loved to fish. The lake is only 14 miles away. He would get huge amounts of fish, save them up, and then Bill the cook would have a fish fry for the whole town. Great fish. But after he died, I have to tell you the food was not very good there. They no long refer to him as a cook. Now there is a chef in town. We have a chef in Searchlight. Every day, you see the special-things like stuffed pork chops, spareribs; he even had goulash one night. This guy knows what he is doing.

My wife and I look forward to going into Searchlight. My home is about a mile and a half, 2 miles out; we are still in the metropolitan area, I guess you would call it.

The town has grown since I grew up there. There must be 1,000, 1,200 people in the area. We love to go there now for one of the specials. So Searchlight is moving along.

We have a sewer system on one side of Searchlight. If you live on the east side of the highway, you have sewer. If you live on the west side, no luck: septic tanks.

I, was born there. I really left when I became a freshman in high school. I went back, of course, to visit with my parents. I fell in love with Searchlight. It is a place where I was born, where I grew up, and really developed a lot of the things I thought were right and wrong.

For many years in my congressional service, I didn't even have a real house. I had a mobile home I bought from my uncle, but I never felt good in it. So 2 years ago this next month, my wife and I, after we had gotten our five children through school and college, built ourselves a modest home in Searchlight. I love that place. It is such a nice retreat, going from the metropolitan Washington area out there 55 miles from Las Vegas.

We made a few mistakes in building that house. My wife actually did it. One of the mistakes she made was she put in a little sprinkler system and planted some stuff around the house. Well, the stuff was eaten by rabbits in about a week. They hadn't had a feast like that ever, probably. So we went to the extension service and said: We would like you to tell us what we can put in there that the rabbits won't eat-rabbitproof. They loved that. They came back in a week or so. We spent some more money planting again.

This was even better. The rabbits learned there was something there, and they finished this off in 3 days-3 nights. They won't eat in the daytime. Here we were. What were we going to do?

Looking around the desert, I noticed they didn't eat cactus, or I thought they didn't eat cactus. They didn't eat desert cactus. They ate my cactus. We planted a bunch of cactus. I can't imagine how they can do it, but they eat some cactus-not all of them. I don't know the names of the cactus they don't eat. Some of the names I know. They don't eat the cholla. They don't eat the beaver tails. They don't eat a plant that is not native to Searchlight, Ocotilla from Arizona, a long stringy plant with stems that go up very high. They don't eat those.

So I have replanted my house several times. They are good, these rabbits. What I did was, some of our big cactus, I told the cactus guy-Cactus Joe is his name-in Las Vegas. He brings his truck. "Come and see what they ate, and bring something they don't eat." Oh, sure, they are happy to bring Tommy Lee and his crew out. They planted-oh, man, some of these things were big, beautiful green cactus. I got up the next morning, and they had ravaged my cactus.

They looked like these big things with big holes in them. They chomped them through. I called one of my friends in Las Vegas and said I needed some help-my friend Gary Bates. He responded and came out with some wire, pliers, and all that kind of stuff. We picked some of these cactus these rabbits wouldn't eat. Do you know, they figured a way to get through that wire. I don't know how they did that. I don't know how they got those big ears through there, but they did. They didn't ravage them; they just kind of chomped on them a little bit. I might be able to save some of them.

So that is my story of my cactus.

I was out there, as I said, Saturday night. I had dinner with a couple of my Senator friends in Searchlight. The first thing I did was look at my cactus crop. It was dark, and I couldn't see. I was pleased it wasn't worse than it was. We planted some more Ocotilla, which is rabbitproof, proven from prior plantings of my Ocotilla.

These rabbits are interesting animals. I used to always like those cottontails. In Searchlight, we have cottontails, cute little rabbits about so big. Then we have the big jackrabbits. I developed a strong dislike for cottontails because they are worse on my cactus than the jackrabbits.

Anyway, I will take a sip of water and go to chapter 6. I guess there is no word about votes around here, so I will just keep reading.

Let's see, at 8:16 it will be 7 hours. My only regret is I should have started earlier on my book. I was a little bit repetitive.

Before I start chapter 6, let me just say this. I understand the rules of the Senate pretty well, and I know today there could have been a vote offered by somebody if I hadn't gotten the floor. There could have been a vote on a motion to table somebody's amendment. I know the Senator from Arizona was going to offer an amendment because he told me so. Maybe it was an amendment the other side didn't like. I don't know. And tomorrow, or whenever we come in again, another amendment can be offered.

Under the rules of the Senate normally followed, when someone offers an amendment, the person who offers the amendment speaks on its behalf; those opposed to the amendment speak against that amendment. The person who offers it can speak for as long as they want, and the person who opposes it can speak for as long as they want. I wanted to make sure today that because of what we were told would happen, I was going to do what I could to see if it wouldn't happen.

I don't miss many votes. The only votes I have missed in recent years have been for my friend, the junior Senator from Nevada. I have paired with him on a number of occasions because of family issues; he has a young family, and I have been happy to do that. I don't mind missing a few votes. I was not missing them. I was here. But I am happy to pair. We used to do it a lot in the Senate. It was the thing to do. If somebody had something important, we would vote yes or no.

We have become so interested in voting records. We vote on things here that don't mean anything of importance. Most everything we vote on here passes overwhelmingly, but we have to have votes: I can't miss that judge's vote; oh, I can't do that. I say: It is going to pass; everybody is going to vote for him or her. Why worry about it? I can't miss a vote.

But anyway, I have paired with my friend from Nevada on occasion. The last time I paired with him, he had not been able to watch any of his son's football games the whole year because they don't play on Friday or Sunday.

He said: I sure would like to watch Trevor's game. I said: Go watch Trevor's game. It is more important than what we do on this occasion because a year from now, 2 years from now, your son's football game is going to be more important than the votes that happen here. I am glad he watched his son's football game.

My friend, Senator Ensign, is glad he watched his son's football game. The only point I am making is we have votes all the time. We can have a vote tonight. I do not care. I am going to be here. It does not matter what time we have it. I am here all the time. We can have votes tomorrow, but I understand the rules of the Senate, and we have to work together.

I want the record to be spread, as it has been, that this 30-hour judges thing is not the way to run this place. It is simply not right. If we tried something like this I hope I would have the integrity to speak out against it. I believe I would. I hope I do.

When we have so many important things to do in this Congress, we do not have the time to spend 30 hours on our turndown of 4 judges that President Bush has put forward: We have approved 168 judges, turned down 4. That is not the way to operate things.

I am very cooperative most of the time. I apologize if I have caused any inconvenience to any of my friends today, but I want to make sure that the inconvenience caused to some today is something that will help us in the future have a more organized, friendly, cooperative partnership in the Senate. It is going to be hard for the next few days doing that when we are going to spend 30 hours, starting Wednesday at 6 going until midnight on Thursday, talking about how badly-that is wrong-we have treated Miguel Estrada, Justice Owen, Judge Pickering, and General Pryor, people who, I repeat, have well-paying jobs.

Is it important that we devote our time to that? I mean, have a vigil for 3 hours, not 30 hours. There is not going to be anything new said in 30 hours that could not be said in 3 hours. I am interested to see if anything new will be said in the whole 30 hours that has not been said already.

Mr. DURBIN. Will the Senator yield for a question without yielding the floor?

Mr. REID. I yield to my friend from Illinois without losing the floor.

Mr. DURBIN. I would like to ask the Senator from Nevada, through the Chair, as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, each of these nominees who has been contested, four nominees who have been contested-it is my understanding 168 of the President's nominees have been approved and four have been held, and as a member of this committee I can say to the Senator from Nevada, in preparation for my question, Miguel Estrada, I might mention there was a lengthy hearing. It may have been two hearings, if I am not mistaken, and a lot of questions asked by individual Senators and then several lengthy debates on the floor of the Senate leading to the cloture votes.

In the case of the nominee, Priscilla Owen, who is a Texas Supreme Court Justice, she was not only given a hearing and considered previously and rejected, she was brought again for another consideration by the committee and more debate on the floor.

When it comes to Attorney General Pryor of Arkansas, I can recall it was a very lengthy hearing in the large hearing room over at the Hart Building, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and then with Judge Pickering, another district court judge from Mississippi, who received two separate hearings, and then after those hearings was rejected, then brought back again, more lengthy debate. So I ask the Senator from Nevada, through the Chair, is it his belief that any of these four nominees have been treated rudely by the committee or denied an opportunity for a hearing or given a chance in the Senate to have had their qualifications considered before the votes were taken?

Mr. REID. I say to my friend from Illinois, through the distinguished Chair, there has never been any suggestion that these nominees were treated like President Clinton's nominees and not given hearings. The answer is, no.

I also say to my friend, assuming for purposes of this debate only, that every one of the decisions we made-that is the Senate Democrats made-with these four nominees, that we were wrong, we should not have done it, is that any reason to take the time of this Senate to spend 30 hours on four nominees? I am only stating this for purposes of this debate, that even if we made four wrong decisions, should we spend 30 hours of our time talking about what is going on? Thirty hours? I just cannot believe that.

Mr. DURBIN. Will the Senator yield for another question, through the Chair, without yielding the time?

Mr. REID. I would do that. Any time I hear someone shuffling around the room, I am always hoping it is people coming to hear more about my book. I am on chapter 6 and I can tell everybody it gets better. This is kind of the buildup. I thought
the naming of the town was pretty good. I thought the strike was pretty good.

Mr. DURBIN. If the Senator would yield?

Mr. REID. I would say I thought my dissertation on the rabbits and cactus was okay. In fact, I wish I had known at the time how bad those rabbits were, and I may have talked about them in my book. I am becoming more of a coyote fan all the time, hoping that they win more battles with the rabbits.

Anyway, I would be happy to yield to the Senator from Illinois for a question only, without losing my right to the floor.

Mr. DURBIN. Well, being from Illinois, I cannot get into the rabbit and cactus debate as some of my colleagues, perhaps my colleague from Arizona might be able to, but I ask my colleague from the State of Nevada, through the Chair, the following question: Is it his hope this evening we will lead to a point where there is a vote so that Members will have a chance to vote before the end of the day? Is that the Senator's goal in taking the floor as he has?

Mr. REID. I say to my friend, I personally do not care whether we vote or not. I think it is late. I am not sure we need a vote. I am not sure people are here to vote, but I really do not care. I simply want everyone to know, as I have said on several occasions, that someone who can be maybe not the most cooperative-but I think I am in the top 20 or so of being cooperative around here-I am happy to be cooperative in the future. But I repeat, on more than one occasion I have said today that we cannot be treated this way. We are part of the program here.

We cannot tell people who live in California there is going to be a vote. They ask, well, what time is that vote going to be on Monday?

Well, we don't know.

What is it going to be on?

We don't know, maybe something dealing with the Commerce-State-Justice.

Well, what if an amendment is going to be brought up, is it not going to be debated?

I don't know.

I had a call from somebody who had a schedule in the eastern part of the United States today. He said: Should I come?

I said: I don't know. I am going to try to protect you, but I don't know if I can.

Here we are. To compound things, tomorrow is a national holiday that Senator Daschle originally agreed to work and have votes on so we could get out of here.

So I don't know if there is going to be a vote. I don't know. I don't know if there is going to be a vote. I really don't know, but maybe when I finish there will be a decision made on that. Maybe tomorrow we will have a better idea of what the schedule is. I hope that in the scheduling for tomorrow we will have some definition tonight what that scheduling is going to be.

Those people in the West have lost their day. They cannot go West to enter into functions sponsored by veterans on Veterans Day. They cannot do that now. They have been brought back here for various and sundry reasons, none of which they understand. If people had some idea tonight, there are still things on the East Coast that people could still do tomorrow. I am sure maybe the Senator from Illinois, if he knew what the schedule was tomorrow he could return to the Chicago area or other parts of Illinois and do things. But those of us in the West cannot do that. So that is where we are.

Chapter 6, "The Big Mine," M-I-N-E.

If one travels to Searchlight today and drives or walks around the area, he or she will see scores of mines, mine dumps, tailing remnants, gallows frames, and even collapsed mill sites. The names of the mines are entertaining and curious: Empire, Good Hope, Good Enough, New Era, Blossom, Key, Tiger, Barney Riley, Rajah, Yucca, Shoshone, Ironclad, Parallel, Searchlight Mining and Milling (M&M), Western, Berdie, Pan American, Elvira, Mesa, Pompeii, Southern Nevada, Telluride, Empire, Red Bird, Blue Bird, Saturn, Santa Fe, Philadelphia, Eddie, Ora Flame, Carrie Nation, Magnolia, Hyacinth, Poppy, Parrot, Spokane, Cushman, Dubuque, Golden Garter, Silk Stocking, Eclipse, June Bug, Little Bug, Cushman, Duplex, Water Spout, Cyrus Noble, Golden Rod, Water Wagon, Bellevue, Chief of the Hills, Crown King, Quaker Girl, Iditarod, Greyhound, New York, Stratford, Quintette, Columbia, Gold Legion, Calivada, Annette, Gold Coin, Gold Dyke-these are but a sampling of the myriad claims that make up the Searchlight mining district. A few of the mines were sporadically good producers, especially the Duplex, Blossom, Good Hope, and Good Enough.

Mr. ROBERTS. Will the distinguished Senator yield for a question?

Mr. REID. I will yield for a question not to exceed 1 minute, Mr. President, without my losing my right to the floor.

Mr. ROBERTS. I thank the distinguished Senator. While sitting in my capacity as the acting Presiding Officer, going back to chapter four of your book, I got a little confused as to how the city of Searchlight actually was named Searchlight. I got mixed up between Lloyd Searchlight and the kitchen matches. I was wondering if you, with your intimate knowledge of who is a chef and who is a cook and poor Bill who has died-obviously you don't have any fish fries anymore, but I am interested in the goulash-but with your intimate knowledge of Searchlight, do you have a theory, a pet theory as to how Searchlight actually got its name, of the three hypotheses that you mentioned?

Mr. REID. I actually know how Searchlight got its name, I say to my friend through the distinguished Presiding Officer. Searchlight got its name because someone said, "I found gold," and someone said he would "need a searchlight to find it." I feel fairly certain that was it.

I think, as I said in my book, if I took the naming of Searchlight to a jury I would win, but not every time. We know the Lloyd Searchlight thing is history that, as I said, only deserved one paragraph. I gave it two. But it is not much of a theory.

But the one dealing with the matches is pretty good. I think that is something that a jury once in a while-if we did it 10 times, maybe 2 out of the 10 would find that.

Mr. ROBERTS. If the distinguished Senator would yield one more time-

Mr. REID. Under the same conditions.

Mr. ROBERTS. Those were kitchen matches, not the modern?

Mr. REID. Oh, yes, I say to my friend who remembers those little wooden matches.

Mr. ROBERTS. Yes.

Mr. REID. He remembers those wooden matches. They still have them now but usually they are hard to find and usually they have the real long ones they use for lighting fireplaces.

Yes, the Senator from Kansas, I know, remembers those wood matches. I compliment the Senator from Kansas for being so attentive. You did pick up a lot. You were here for quite a few chapters.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, if I could just ask one more additional question of the Senator?

Mr. REID. Under the same conditions.

Mr. ROBERTS. Did you ever solve the problem with the rabbits with regard to the cactus they would eat or wouldn't eat? And I was wondering if you thought about just basically desert rocks? They have some beautiful rocks out there and I doubt seriously if the rabbits would have eaten the rocks.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, the cactus is an ongoing saga. The cactus, I am working on that. I am not going to say in front of everybody how much money I have spent on cactus. My wife knows and is not very happy about it. I hope she is not watching because I just spent a few more dollars.

Mr. ROBERTS. Rubber tires, perhaps?

Mr. REID. Oh, no, my home is much nicer than rubber tires. In fact, we do have a magnificent rock. I am glad you mentioned that.

In front of a great Joshua tree, we have a rock that was hauled to my home that is as big as, oh, probably, four of these Senate desks put together. The reason it is so meaningful to me is, in the days as I was a boy growing up, my father and uncles-and people in Searchlight-would engage in single-jacking contests. Single-jacking contests are contests where a man with a piece of hardened steel that has been sharpened very sharp, with a big hammer that you handled with one hand but which had a great big head on it, not like a carpenter's hammer-they would have contests during a 10-minute period of time to see how deep you could dig into that rock.

Now I have that rock, where a number of contests were held, driving these pieces of steel with a single-jack into these rocks. My dad participated in some of these events. As I drive into my home, there is this great big rock and I take people out and show them these holes. I don't know specifically which ones my dad was involved in, but he was a single-jacker in his earlier days.

I am glad you mentioned the rock.

My cousin, who has a master's degree-never used it-started mining from the time he was a few years younger than me. He started mining up at Crescent. I talked about him in the first part of my book because his dad was very into that.

His son, never having worked in mines, decided that was what he was going to do. He spent the last 25 years or so working up there, making very little money until the last few years. He didn't make any money from gold. But a Searchlight contractor came to him and saw this beautiful rock that he dug out. It had no gold in it but it was red and all variations in color. He said: How about selling me some of this? So he entered into a contract.

We build thousands of homes every year in Las Vegas. With water being as scarce as it is, there is a lot of desert landscaping going on in Las Vegas. My cousin has made a lot of money in recent years selling rock.

Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, if I could just ask one more question and I will desist.

Mr. REID. Under the same conditions, Mr. President.

Mr. ROBERTS. I thought perhaps with your cousin, again, you could replace those cactus with rocks and I know the
rabbits wouldn't eat the rocks. But in any case I think the operative thought would be to simply "rock on."

Mr. REID. Mr. President, my friend from Kansas is absolutely right. We probably should rock on.

I know this is not drawing a lot of people and certainly is not going to take away from Monday night football, but I did get a call from my friend who is a Congressman from Nevada by the name of JIM GIBBONS. JIM is somebody who has a distinguished military record. On the first flights that went to Iraq the first time, he was in the first formation of airplanes that went into Iraq through all that flak and other stuff.

He is an American war hero. He is a lawyer and a geologist. He served in the Nevada State Legislature. He is now a long-time Congressman. When he was in the State legislature, he initiated an action that led to the amending of the Nevada State Constitution to require a two-thirds vote on all tax issues.

JIM said: I am from Sparks; say something nice about Sparks. So I will do that.

My first remembrance of Sparks, I say to my friend, Congressman JIM GIBBONS, was when I was a little boy. My hair was not as red as that of one of the pages. She is not here tonight. But she has really red hair. People thought I had red hair, strawberry blonde, or red. It has turned gray.

The first thing I say to Congressman Gibbons about Sparks is, when I was a little boy, the bus used to stop in Searchlight. A woman got off the bus. I didn't know she had come from Sparks. Sparks is where the mental institution is. I was just standing there, this poor little kid. I must have been about 8 years old. She got off the bus and said: You little SOB, you have been following me. I am tired of it.

I was scared to death. That is my first memory of Sparks. I learned later she had just gotten out of the insane asylum. This woman haunted me for weeks. My parents explained to me that she had come from an insane asylum and she had not gotten it all together.

I say to Congressman Gibbons from Sparks, we still have the State mental institution. Sparks is a workingman's town. Sparks is connected to Reno. There is no space between the two towns. Sparks was a railroad town. They are working on a better version of a railroad museum that needs to be developed there. The railroad still goes through Sparks. It is still an
important part of Sparks. It is a resort area. It is a very nice resort with a hotel and casino. It is a very nice place.

So, Congressman Gibbons, Sparks is a great place. It is part of what makes Nevada. One of the things that makes Nevada as good as it is is the people who come from Nevada, not the least of whom is Congressman Gibbons.

I probably should say something about Senator Ensign. I will have to say a few things, I guess, about everybody. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings. Senator Ensign and I have comparable backgrounds in many respects. Senator Ensign is a long-time Nevadan. He spent most of his time in Nevada as he was growing up in the Lake Tahoe area. I don't remember exactly, but I think about 6th through the 10th grades. He was an athlete there. He still calls Lake Tahoe one of his favorite places in Nevada. Senator Ensign, as we all know, served in the House of Representatives. Prior to doing that, he was a veterinarian in Las Vegas. Senator Ensign and I hold the distinction of being alternates to the military academy. And we say for those people who want to go to the academy, if they can't make it to one of the academies, maybe they can wind up being a Senator. That is what happened to Senator Ensign, and that is what happened to me.

JOHN has a wonderful family. His father and I have been friends for many years. Our congressional delegation is really growing. For many years-from the time we became a State in 1864 until 1982-we only had one Member of Congress. Now we have three House Members and two Senators. My old House seat is now held by Congresswoman SHELLEY BERKLEY.

I see the distinguished senior Senator from Michigan in the Chamber. He knows Shelley Berkley, a wonderful woman. She is so good at what she does. She has been a member of the State legislature in Nevada. She has been a member of the Board of Regents in Nevada. Now she is in her fourth term as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. She is a wonderful woman. She is married to a fine physician who is tremendously supportive of her. She has had some very difficult elections, but not anymore. That is her congressional district which she represents extremely well.

We have a new seat. The seat Congressman Gibbons holds is a heavily Republican district. The seat Congresswoman Berkley holds is a heavily Democratic district. The seat Congressman Jon Porter holds is one of the seats divided between Democrats and Republicans. He served previously as mayor of Boulder City, then as a member of the Nevada State Senate, and was elected in the first term as a Member of the House of Representatives.

I appreciate Congressman Gibbons. If he or his staff, or both, are watching what we are doing here today, as I said, I talked about Searchlight and Congressman Gibbons wanted to make sure I said something about Sparks. I am happy to do that. It is a pleasure to work with the people who serve in the Nevada Congressional Delegation. They are wonderful people. I am proud of each one of them.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I wonder if the Senator will yield for a question without losing his right to the floor.

Mr. REID. I would be happy to. I know that by yielding for a question I don't give up the floor, but I always say "without giving up my right to the floor" just to make sure. Because the Chair changes all the time, I want to make sure the Chair understands I don't have to say "without losing my right to the floor."

I will be happy to yield for a question of my friend from Michigan as long as the question doesn't exceed 2½ or 3 minutes.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I tried to catch as much as I possibly could about the Senator's exposition of Searchlight on the monitor in our offices. It is an absolutely fascinating history which he has shared with the Senate.

I point out that the Senator who is doing this tonight is surely one of the most patient, determined, and beloved Members
of the Senate. I ask this question of him as somebody who I think in the Senate on both sides of the aisle is admired, as somebody who tries to keep this institution working, and who has accommodated every Member of this Senate over the years, be it Republicans or Democrats.

My question relates to Searchlight. I want to just see if the place I actually went through with my wife on our way to Death Valley, CA, might have been Searchlight. We went through it at night. It was a town in Nevada-a very long town. It was in a valley. It was probably 10 times longer than it was wide. It was one of those nights where all the lights of the town sparkled. I am sure Nevada probably has some of the clearest air in the world. I wonder whether or not that is the shape of Searchlight. Is it a very long, rectangular town?

Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I could say to my friend, my friend went through Pahrump, not Searchlight. That was Pahrump. Searchlight is very short. You are through Searchlight in less than a mile on the highway.

Pahrump is a town that is, by the way, now more than 40,000 people, unincorporated. It is a town that was blessed with large amounts of water. Pahrump is some Indian term dealing with water. It has lots of water. They actually grew cotton in large quantities in Pahrump for many decades. It is very water intense.

With the growth of Las Vegas, Pahrump has become almost a bedroom community for Las Vegas. It is one of gateways to Death Valley. It is a place just as the distinguished Senator described, a long, narrow town that goes on for miles. As I said, it is growing significantly and is part of Nye County, which is the second largest county in America, second only to San Bernardino County.

Let me say to my friend, I want the distinguished Senator from Michigan to know what a solace it is to me the Senator from Michigan is the leading Democrat, the number one Democrat, the ranking member on the Armed Services Committee. There are a lot of different personalities and character traits we all have in the Senate. The Senator from Michigan has a couple, all positive. One is, nothing gets by the Senator from Michigan. There is not a sentence in the bill the Senator is involved in that he does not understand. There is not any agreement they enter into that the Senator is a part of that he does not understand. When we deal with the defense and security of this Nation, it does my heart good to know the Senator from Michigan is involved in helping make our country safe and secure.

I appreciate his kind comments. In an effort to indicate to the Senate my fondness for the Senator from Michigan, the first time I met the senior Senator from Michigan, I was a member of the House of Representatives. We met. I proudly said to the Senator from Michigan, I came to Washington with your brother, Sandy Levin. I said how much I cared about him. The Senator from Michigan said it very quickly: My brother Sandy is not only my brother; he is my friend.

Having three brothers, that meant so much to me. I have always looked at the Senator from Michigan in the context of what he told me about his brother Sandy.

I also say to my friend from Michigan, I had other things to do today than be here and do what I am doing today. We are talking about Searchlight now. But for 3 hours I had to be aware of the Pastore rule and talk about the bill. I talked about that for approximately 3 more hours, about substantive issues. I tried to lay the groundwork in this body to show that we, as the Senate, should be concerned about a number of things.

We should be concerned, as in this chart, about the things that are going up. Uninsured medical, going up. This is during the Bush term of office, almost 3 years now. The number of poor is going up. The unemployed numbers are going way up. The budget deficit, the largest ever in this country; the national debt, going way up. I thought it would be better that we as the Senate talk about the issues that are going up rather than spending 30 hours on something going down, the lowest rate of Federal vacancies in the Judiciary in almost 15 years.

The Senator understands procedures of this body as well as I do. The Senator understands the Senate was developed by our Founding Fathers not to protect the majority; it was developed to protect the minority. The minority has trouble protecting itself and the majority never does. It was developed for more than protecting the Senate minority, but it was set up to protect the minority so that in pieces of legislation where people had no advocacy and only the moneyed interests were pushing through, the minority could do something about it.

One area of responsibility we have as Senators is to protect what goes on in the Senate. The distinguished majority whip came to the floor the first thing this morning and said, I think it is unfair we have been criticized for poor leadership-we, the Republicans. We have done great things. We passed 10 appropriations bills; you only passed three. We have done lots of good things.

What he failed to say-and anyone who knows anything about the Senate knows you cannot do things on a one-party basis here. They passed 10 appropriations bills because we let them, because we thought it was good for this country.

When we were in the majority, they would not let us pass them, as we all remember. But this, as I said before, is not payback time. This is time to be responsible.

We were on the path to pass all 13 appropriations bills. I talked to Senator Stevens on several occasions about ways to
help him. The Presiding Officer knows we could have passed the Agriculture bill in less than 1 day. Why didn't we? Because as we are working hard, agreeing to work today, November 10th and on a holiday, November 11th, there is a program being conducted to keep us in session from Wednesday at 6 until Thursday at midnight. To do what? To talk about unemployment? To talk about unemployment benefits? To talk about minimum wage? To talk about health care? To talk about the environment? To talk about all the important issues we have to deal with? No, we are going to talk about Federal judges for 30 hours. Can you imagine that? Thirty hours to talk about Federal judges.

What have we done that is such a bad job with judges? As I said to the Senator from Illinois a little while ago, I say to my friend, assume the four judges we turned down-Estrada, Owen, Pickering, and Prior-assume we were wrong. Just for purposes of argument, we were wrong, we made a bad decision on every one of them. Is that any reason to hold up the Senate, and the country, for 30 hours? But the fact is, we were not wrong. The fact is, we did the right thing for this country to keep out a man by the name of Pickering, who every civil rights group in America opposed. Every one. Every one. I am saying we did the right thing by keeping Miguel Estrada from going onto the bench. Why? Because he thought he was somebody who did not have to answer questions like everyone else. He thought because he was so smart and graduated first in his class that his intellectual abilities before the dumb Democrats on the Judiciary Committee-he didn't have to deal with those people. He could just waltz through. He didn't have to tell people how he felt. He showed more of his arrogance when he said, I don't have to give you the memorandum I wrote while I was in the Solicitor's Office. We did the country a favor by turning him down.

We have done the country a favor by turning down Justice Owen, a Texas Supreme Court Justice who even the President's lawyer doesn't want to be on the court. That is what he said in some of his opinions-he dissented, she didn't-in Texas.

William Pryor-give me a break. We did the country another favor.

So we are going to spend 30 hours of this Senate's valuable time talking about 4 judges who were turned down. How many have we approved? One hundred sixty-eight. How many more on the calendar will we approve? I don't know, but we just have to arrange votes for them. I said to Members of the Judiciary Committee who came here today, I don't like a lot of the 168 we voted on and approved, but I believe the President should have wide latitude in picking these judges. We have given him wide latitude. We have only sifted out the very worst.

Mr. LEVIN. Will the Senator yield for a question without losing your right to the floor.

Mr. REID. I would be happy to do that for my friend from Michigan.

Mr. LEVIN. Are there not two other factors involved here: One, that in all four cases there has been significant debate on each of those four judges before the votes that were cast, the cloture votes which were cast? As a matter of fact, there is a suggestion there may be additional cloture votes for which debates would be totally appropriate. If the majority is going to bring up additional cloture votes on any of those judges, there would be debate before cloture on those judges. But what the 30-hour proposal is, is something which does not lead to votes.

Is the Senator from Michigan correct, there are no votes at the end of the 30-hour use of the Senate's time?

(Mr. BENNETT assumed the Chair.)

Mr. REID. The Senator from Michigan is absolutely correct. I say to the Senator from Michigan, until Friday, all the time was going to be taken by the majority. After public statements crying for fairness, in the unanimous consent agreement here Friday they said we can take half the time.

Mr. President, I say to my friend from Michigan, of course they have had hearings. Some of these people we voted on numerous times, and every time we vote on them it is the same argument. I can give the arguments. I have listened to them so many times on the other side. We are going to spend 30 hours. Is there going to be a single new thing brought up other than to berate us for destroying the system?

I repeat, Mr. President, on my blackberry here today I got something from the majority leader. Let me see if I can pull down to it here. I have been getting a lot of messages I have not returned today. Let's see what I can find. It is here on my blackberry. Here it is. Here is what it says: "What we are doing to move our judicial nominations forward." That is the title of the deal here: Judges.

This year the Senate has suffered an unprecedented obstruction of a President's judicial nominees by filibuster. In the history of our Nation this has never been done before.

Of course it has been done before. It has been done while I have been here. I have not been here that long. It has been done just the last few years. I do not have it here-yes, I do. Lisa has it up here. We know that right here we have many judges who never even got a hearing, but for Barkett, Paez, Berzon, we had to file a petition to invoke cloture, and cloture was invoked before we got to vote on these.

Now, on these, remember, you need 41 votes to stop a cloture. They almost got it with Paez. For Berzon they got 34 votes; Barkett, 37 votes.

Mr. LEVIN. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. REID. So I say to my friend, what makes it even worse than these people is what happened to my friend from Michigan. For my friend from Michigan, they would not even give his people hearings. They ignored him. They are gone.

So I say to my friend from Michigan, we have been fair. We have been fair in the treatment of judges. We have done what we feel is fair, 168. One hundred sixty eight, let's understand that. This is not anything that is too hard to understand. I know I am being somewhat facetious here: 168 to 4-168 to 4-168 judges approved during the less than 3 years this man has been President. We have turned down 4-1, 2, 3, 4. That is how many we have turned down.

Now, does that deserve something? Does that deserve 30 hours in the last few days, the waning hours of this Congress? I do not think so. I do not think so.

Now, we have said many times this is not payback time. And that is established by this 168 to 4. Look at what happened-look at what happened-during the Clinton years. Nominees blocked: 63. Percent blocked: 20 percent. Bush: 2 percent.

Now, as I said here earlier today, if we only blocked 2, and it dropped to 1 percent, do you think 15 hours is what they deserve for talking about judges-15 hours, I say to my friend?

Well, I think we have treated them fairly. I do not know how many of these 63 people who were treated poorly were from the State of Michigan, but I know of a couple because I have had conversations with my friend from Michigan. I so appreciate the Senator bringing this to the attention of the Senate through the questions that he has asked.

That is why we are here. As I said earlier, I have other things to do. We all do. But I am here today not as Harry Reid, a Senator from Nevada. I am here today as Harry Reid, the person representing the Democrats who feel it is unfair that we are going to spend 30 hours, beginning at 6 o'clock on Wednesday, going until midnight on Thursday, when we have such important things to do, and when we have bent over backward to make this new majority leader's life a pleasant life. We have been so easy on him because we believe that is our function.

Mr. LEVIN. Will the Senator yield for an additional question?

Mr. REID. I will yield for a question without losing the floor.

Mr. LEVIN. Without losing your right to the floor.

I wonder if your staff could put that other chart on with the judges because I just want to expand on one or two points. Some of the judges which the good Senator from Nevada pointed out were judges where cloture votes were required by the opponents of the judges; is that not correct, during the Clinton years, and it was required there be 60 votes in order to get those cloture motions adopted?

Mr. REID. Yes. We have here Rosemary Barkett, Eleventh Circuit, where a cloture motion had to be filed.

Mr. LEVIN. Now, does that not mean, for people who might be watching this, that it was required that the supporters of that judge produce 60 votes?

Mr. REID. I say to my friend, that is absolutely right. Barkett, Paez, and Berzon all required 60 votes-60 votes. Without 60 votes, these people could not serve. And so for someone to have the audacity to say: By filibuster, the first time it has been done in the history of our Nation; it has never been done before-it has been done not only here but other times. Other times it has happened.

Now, I say to my friend, there have been other occasions where the filibuster was conducted, and it was obvious to the nominee that person was not going to be able to break the impasse, so to speak, and they quit. We know that Abe Fortas, who wanted to become the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, he withdrew when he saw he could not get enough votes to break the filibuster. So that is simply the fact. That is a fact of life.

So, please, I say to my friend, the majority leader, or anyone else, do not say it has never happened before. We have done it four times this year to protect our role. As the Senator from Illinois, Mr. Durbin, pointed out earlier today, our role, which article II, section 2 of the Constitution of the United States states, is that we advise and consent to the President of the United States. We believe that is our role as it relates to those Federal judges.

These are lifetime appointments. These are very important positions. They are prestigious. They are important. These judges have the ability of life and death through the stroke of a pen-life and death of an individual, of a company, a course of action, a labor union, a business.

So I think what we have done is appropriate. Would it be better for us to not have the advise and consent role-just say: President Bush, send them all up. We will take them all. In fact, we will vote on 20 at a time. Just bring them up. We will vote on them 20 at a time. We have nothing to say about it, so just put them on through.

Now the majority is going to come and say: Well, yes, but let's give them up-or-down votes. What they are saying is: We do not want to play by our rules. We want to play by somebody else's rules.

They demanded filibusters, and we were able to break those. Thank goodness there were some people on the other side who recognized this was not right. But do not say we have never had filibusters. We have had them.