[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 127 (Tuesday, September 13, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 13, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                      UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT

  Mr. MITCHELL. Madam President, a short time ago I propounded a 
unanimous-consent request under which the Senate would come into 
session at 9 a.m. tomorrow. Senator Roth would be recognized for 10 
minutes in morning business. At 9:10, the Senate would take up the 
nomination of Admiral Mauz. There would be 2 hours for debate on that 
nomination equally divided and, upon the use or yielding back of those 
2 hours, Senator Murray would be recognized to make a motion to 
recommit the nomination if she chose to do so at that time; that if she 
decided not to make such a motion or if she did make such a motion and 
it was not agreed to by the Senate, then the Senate would proceed to 
vote on the nomination of Admiral Mauz; and that following disposition 
of the nomination, the Senate would then have 7 hours of morning 
business with the time equally divided and under the control of myself 
and the minority leader.
  Now, Madam President, I renew that request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. COATS. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. COATS. Madam President, there has been some confusion on the 
exact procedure for tomorrow's business. I certainly understand and 
respect the rights of the Senator from Washington to seek to vote.
  However, during the last vote, it was fairly widely disseminated 
among Republican Senators that there would only be one vote. So many 
Senators, including the Republican leader, have made plans on that 
basis.
  It comes now somewhat as a surprise that there possibly could be two 
votes on this. The suggestion has been made that the vote on the motion 
to recommit be considered the vote on this nomination. We assume that a 
second vote on confirmation would be identical to the vote on the 
motion to recommit. Members who voted to recommit would be those who 
voted against the nomination so it would not affect the outcome of the 
vote.
  However, because the second vote places certain Members, including 
the Republican leader, in a difficult situation from a time standpoint, 
I would be constrained to object to that request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard to the unanimous consent 
request.
  The majority leader.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Madam President, I regret the objection.
  First, let me say that, although I have not been personally involved 
in this matter, I have understood for weeks since this matter first 
came up that Senator Murray was considering a motion to recommit the 
nomination. I regret it has come as a surprise to anyone and that is 
possibly the lack of communication on our part. But I have been aware 
of that for some time.
  Second, I think it should be clear there are other Senators besides 
Senator Murray who have an interest in this matter and who believe it 
should be thoroughly explored.
  Third, the result of the objection will be that we could still have 
the same number of votes but at an uncertain time. I am going to be 
here so it is not a matter of my personal convenience, but I think that 
leads to greater inconvenience for a large number of Senators.
  Unless our Republican colleagues intend to filibuster the nomination 
to delay any votes from occurring tomorrow, which I do not think they 
want to do because I think most of them support the nomination, then we 
are going to be in the position of maybe having one vote or two votes--
I do not know how many--after 11, which makes it less convenient for a 
larger number of Senators. I repeat it makes no difference to me. But I 
was just trying to accommodate as many colleagues as possible.
  Finally, let me say Senator Murray has merely reserved her right to 
make a motion to recommit. She has not said she will do so. She has 
presented some questions in writing. I understand she is awaiting or 
has just received the answers to those questions and appropriately 
wants the opportunity to review them before deciding on how best to 
proceed. So I understand the reason for the objection but I think it is 
unfortunate that it produces a result that is less convenient for a 
large number of Senators.
  What I would like to do now is to propose that the 10 minutes of 
morning business for Senator Roth, who has just spoken to me and 
indicated he would be agreeable to doing that this evening following 
Senator Dodd's remarks--that that be accomplished so he be convenienced 
and the time be saved tomorrow. So, first, I ask unanimous consent that 
upon the completion of Senator Dodd's remarks, which I understand will 
follow those of Senator Metzenbaum----
  Mr. METZENBAUM. Mr. Leader, I have no problem about yielding to 
Senator Dodd. But I have another matter that I wish to bring to the 
attention of the Senate.
  Mr. MITCHELL. And the Senator was waiting.
  Would it be agreeable to Senator Roth to go after Senator Metzenbaum?
  Mr. ROTH. May I ask how long that would be?
  Mr. METZENBAUM. I would say 10 to 12 minutes.
  Mr. ROTH. No objection.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Then, Madam President, am I correct in my understanding 
that Senator Dodd has obtained consent that he be recognized to address 
the Senate for a specified period of time following the conclusion----
  Mr. METZENBAUM. Following my remarks concerning Senator Riegle.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct, Senator Dodd has 20 minutes 
following Senator Metzenbaum's remarks.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Then I ask unanimous consent that following Senator 
Dodd's remarks, Senator Metzenbaum be recognized to address the Senate 
as in morning business for up to 15 minutes?
  Mr. METZENBAUM. Ten minutes--fifteen minutes. I will not take that 
much.
  Mr. MITCHELL. For up to 15 minutes. That following Senator 
Metzenbaum's remarks, Senator Roth be recognized to address the Senate 
for up to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to that unanimous-consent 
request?
  Mr. COATS. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object to 
that request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. COATS. I am wondering if the majority leader wants to include in 
that request a start time for tomorrow for the Mauz nomination debate. 
Since Senator Roth will speak this evening, it may be we can advance 
the beginning times or release some of the time that was reserved for 
Senator Roth and that would help expedite the schedule.
  Mr. MITCHELL. I was going do that next, but it is so hard to get 
these agreements. I find it is somewhat better to do them a little bit 
at a time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader has the floor.
  Mr. MITCHELL. I would like to renew the request I made.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. METZENBAUM. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object. 
I just want to explain to the majority leader, I wish to take 5 or 7 
minutes to speak about Senator Riegle. Immediately thereafter, it is my 
understanding Senator Dodd wishes to speak and has time, 15 or 20 
minutes. Subsequent in time to that, I intend to speak on the subject 
of baseball. I am not sure under the unanimous-consent request that has 
been provided for.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, I have just provided for that, up to 15 minutes.
  Mr. METZENBAUM. On baseball?
  Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, on any subject you would like. And then following 
Senator Metzenbaum's remarks, Senator Roth will be recognized to 
address the Senate as in morning business for up to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to that request?
  Mr. COATS. Madam President, once again, reserving the right to object 
and, once again, I will not object, I just want to make the point for 
the Record that, to my knowledge, there is no Senator on the Republican 
side that objects to the procedures and to the rights that the Senator 
from Washington has asserted. It is certainly within her right to ask 
for a motion to recommit. It is certainly within her right to ask for a 
vote on confirmation. We understand that. There is no attempt by any 
Senator that I know of to filibuster the nomination. I think most 
Republican Senators will support that nomination.
  We were merely trying to accommodate some Republican Senators, and 
maybe Democratic Senators, who made plans on, apparently, a 
misunderstanding believing that there would be just one vote. They have 
made those plans accordingly and some may have already left the Chamber 
and are leaving town on that basis.
  The feeling is that to change their understanding of that without at 
least attempting to move the procedure in such a way that one vote 
would be sufficient is something that is not acceptable to those 
Senators. For that reason, that is why an objection was lodged. I will 
not lodge an objection to the current unanimous-consent request that is 
before the Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. EXON. Reserving the right to object, Madam President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.
  Mr. EXON. I may not object, but I have been waiting now for some time 
because of the announcement of the Senator from Ohio that he was going 
to ask for some kind of unanimous-consent request to call up a matter 
with regard to trust of organized baseball. I intend and want to be 
here to raise an objection on that when it comes up.
  In listening to the discussion, I had assumed that the Senator from 
Ohio would be making that request in the next few minutes. I am now 
advised that that request on baseball might follow all of the other 
unanimous-consent requests for time for speeches.
  I would simply like at this time, if anyone could advise the Senator 
from Nebraska as to how long am I going to be detained here, because I 
am not leaving town early, but how long I will be detained here this 
evening to accommodate everyone else so that I might have the 
opportunity to object when the Senator from Ohio makes his remarks?
  Mr. MITCHELL. Madam President, under the proposed agreement, Senator 
Metzenbaum will be recognized to address the Senate with regard to 
Senator Riegle for up to----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Fifteen minutes.
  Mr. MITCHELL. No. Is there a prior order with respect to Senator 
Metzenbaum speaking on Senator Riegle, parliamentary inquiry to the 
Chair?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no order yet. But your request was 
for 15 minutes.
  Mr. MITCHELL. No; no.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair stands corrected.
  Mr. MITCHELL. I amend my request. In addition to the speaking times 
previously proposed, I ask unanimous consent that upon the completion 
of my remarks and the other consent request I will make, Senator 
Metzenbaum first be recognized to address the Senate regarding Senator 
Riegle for up to 5 minutes; and that thereafter, the remainder of my 
request be in effect; and that is, Senator Dodd for 20 minutes, Senator 
Metzenbaum for 15 minutes, Senator Roth for 10 minutes.
  If that is agreed to then, as soon as I can get these orders 
approved, the Senator from Nebraska will have to wait 35 minutes. So 
there will be 5 minutes with respect to Senator Riegle, 20 minutes for 
Senator Dodd, that is 25; up to 15 minutes for Senator Metzenbaum. A 
maximum of 40 minutes.
  Mr. EXON. I thank my friend. I recognize the difficulty that the 
leader has. I simply remind the leader and the Senate, once again, 
having served here for 16 years, I never, ever have been involved in 
any discussion to say you cannot have more than one vote tomorrow 
because Senator Exon does not want it. I think that we are 
deteriorating this place to the situation where it is almost impossible 
to get anything done.
  But in my usual spirit of cooperation, I will be here for 45 minutes, 
or 1 hour and 45 minutes and I will be here tomorrow without any 
special attention to be given to the Senator from Nebraska. I only wish 
some of my colleagues could take a similar view just once in a while. I 
thank the leader.
  Mr. MITCHELL. I renew my request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.

                          ____________________