[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 11 (Thursday, January 19, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1203-S1206]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      UNFUNDED MANDATE REFORM ACT

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.


                      Unanimous Consent Agreement

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me say for the benefit of all Senators, 
we are going to go through this unanimous consent agreement. I think 
there will be a couple of questions asked. In fact, I wish to make a 
statement after the questions have been asked and each side is 
satisfied with the response, because it has to be in good faith. 
Otherwise, it is not going to work; there is not going to be another 
agreement. You would not give us one, and we would not give you one. If 
it is not in good faith, this may be the last agreement of its kind.
  I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be the only 
first-degree amendments in order to S. 1, and that they be subject to 
relevant second-degree amendments.
  I will not read that list, but there are 47 Democratic amendments, 
and 15 Republican amendments, a total of 62 amendments.
  I further ask unanimous consent that all first-degree amendments must 
be offered by 3 p.m. on Tuesday, January 24.
  I further ask unanimous consent that following the disposition of the 
above-listed amendments, the bill be advanced to third reading.
  I ask unanimous consent that the cloture vote scheduled for tomorrow 
and Saturday be vitiated, and that no votes occur throughout Friday's 
session of the Senate.
  I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business 
today, it stand in recess until 10 a.m. on Friday, January 20, and that 
there be a period for the transaction of routine morning business with 
Senators permitted to speak therein.
  I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business 
on Friday, it stand in recess until 9:30 a.m. on Monday, January 23, 
1995, and that the Senate resume consideration of S. 1 at 10 a.m. on 
Monday, January 23.
  I ask unanimous consent that if a Senator with an amendment on the 
list sends the amendment to the desk to be printed on Friday, that be 
considered as having satisfied the 3 p.m. requirement for having 
amendments offered.
  Finally, I ask unanimous consent that no votes occur on Monday, 
January 23, prior to 4 p.m.
  That is the request. But before I put the request, I think there are 
some questions some might want to address.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, let me thank the distinguished majority 
leader for the good faith in which we have attempted over the last 
several hours to work through this agreement.
  There are a couple of questions on our side I would like to reference 
as they related to the agreement. The first has to do with the 
reference to all amendments being ``offered.'' Could the majority 
leader define for us what you mean by the word ``offer?'' What will be 
required of a Senator to meet the obligations under this unanimous-
consent requirement?
  Mr. DOLE. Well, I assume if there is a pending amendment, they would 
have to get consent to set it aside and send their amendment to the 
desk, and that would be offered.
  Mr. DASCHLE. So it is the intent of the unanimous-consent agreement 
to allow any Senator who has an amendment to take it to the desk and be 
protected for consideration of that amendment during this debate?
  Mr. DOLE. That is correct. We have made an exception for tomorrow 
morning. If somebody wanted to send an amendment and have it printed in 
the Record, that would satisfy the requirements of that section. But it 
is sending the amendment to the desk and first getting consent. That is 
why I think, as we have been in the past--it depends on the good faith 
of side. Somebody can say ``I object to setting the amendment aside,'' 
and he puts in a quorum call and waits until 3 o'clock and there is one 
amendment pending. I think that is one thing we cannot let happen.
  Second, I would hope that all these amendments are not offered. There 
are 60-some amendments. Any Senator could take as much time as he 
wanted after the amendment is offered. He can spend half a day on an 
amendment. We can be here 30 days.
  So this does not preclude--if it is in the judgment of the majority 
leader and since we are not acting in good faith--filing cloture. Nor 
does it preclude cloture if we agree to the request by the Senator from 
West Virginia that we go to third reading and have a period of debate, 
and if that period of debate goes on and on and on, then I assume no 
one objects to someone filing a cloture motion.
  I do not assume all these amendments will be offered. I think many 
may be worked out. Many may be there for some reason but will not be 
offered. But I am prepared to proceed in good faith. I am certain the 
Democratic leader is, also.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, that is certainly my intention. I think I 
speak for all colleagues on this side of the aisle. We want to work 
through the amendments. There are a number on [[Page S1204]] our side, 
and we are prepared to offer them.
  The distinguished majority leader anticipated a second question, and 
for clarification let me again emphasize that it is my understanding 
that the motion to go to third reading is debatable under this 
unanimous-consent agreement.
  Mr. DOLE. As I understand, we would go to third reading, and there 
would be a period for debate.
  Mr. DASCHLE. That is my understanding, after the motion.
  Mr. DOLE. After we have gone to third reading. Any further amendments 
would not be offered, but we would still have a period of debate. There 
is no limitation. We do not say 1, 2, 3, 4 hours. There may not be any. 
As I understand it, the Senator from West Virginia wants to protect his 
interests, in the event some amendment may have been adopted, or not 
offered, or not disposed of properly, to at least raise that point. 
Maybe other Senators on either side have the same position.
  Mr. DASCHLE. This unanimous-consent agreement is the product of a 
great deal of effort on both sides of the aisle by a number of 
participants. I thank all of those Senators involved on our side, 
especially the Senator from West Virginia for his guidance and his 
indulgence in trying to accommodate all Senators as we come to this 
agreement. I do hope that we can move through the amendments in good 
faith, that we can offer them tomorrow, Monday, and Tuesday. Certainly, 
if this agreement is accepted, Senators are protected. That was our 
desire all along.
  So I have no objection to this agreement.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, may I enter into this colloquy and ask one 
question? When you say the amendments are to be offered by a certain 
time, are those amendments that have already been filed considered ones 
that you just--you could repropose them now?
  Mr. DOLE. Those were filed because of the cloture rule.
  Mr. FORD. Under this unanimous-consent agreement, if you have, as I 
do--and we have worked them out, I think, with the majority floor 
leader, my amendments, which then the rest of them would go away. But I 
have to refile those on the basis of setting aside the pending 
amendment, and we go to my amendment, or put them at the desk tomorrow; 
is that the way?
  Mr. DOLE. Correct.
  Mr. FORD. All I have to do is Xerox it and put it in tomorrow 
afternoon or tomorrow sometime?
  Mr. DOLE. I think all anybody has to do--parliamentary inquiry. Is 
there an amendment pending?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no amendment pending.
  Mr. DOLE. So there would not be any amendment pending. After the 
first one is offered, you would have to set that aside and simply send 
the amendment to the desk. I do not know how we decide which amendments 
we take up first. I think that is another question, whether the first 
amendment offered should be taken up first. I assume that would be the 
normal way to do it. Whoever offers their amendment first--many 
Democrats will not be here tomorrow. We will be here. That would 
advantage us. There has to be a way to work that out.
  Mr. FORD. May I continue just a moment? I do not want to belabor it, 
but I want to be sure that my colleagues understand that if they want 
to propose an amendment, they have to be here to do that, under this 
unanimous-consent agreement. And any amendment that has been filed at 
the desk that was filed based on cloture, those amendments are, for all 
practical purposes, under this unanimous-consent agreement, null and 
void?
  Mr. DOLE. That is correct.
  Mr. FORD. I thank the majority leader and the Democratic leader.
  Mr. LEVIN. Will the majority leader yield for a question on that one 
statement of my friend from Kentucky about having to be here to offer 
the amendment. I understand that tomorrow, for those of us who might 
not be able to be here, that somebody could offer the amendment on our 
behalf, get it to the desk, and that would then constitute the filing 
of that amendment in time?
  Mr. DOLE. It says here if a Senator with an amendment sends it to the 
desk to be printed. It would take consent to send an amendment to the 
desk on behalf of someone else. That gets back to the very thing that 
the Senator from West Virginia objected to--somebody else, in effect, 
proxy management, or whatever, sending amendments to the desk. In fact, 
if you want to offer amendments tonight, send them to the desk, I do 
not see any reason that could not be done, as long as we are on the 
bill.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the majority leader.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the unanimous-consent 
request?
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I do not believe the leader has made the 
request yet.
  Mr. DOLE. I said I would withhold until the questions have been 
presented. I do now make the request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the unanimous-consent 
request?
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I reserve the right to object and I do not 
intend to object. I think this is a good agreement.
  Mr. BYRD. As I understand it from the distinguished majority leader's 
responses to the minority leader's questions, and to those of Mr. Ford, 
and others, the second paragraph which uses the word ``offer,'' offered 
by 3 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday, that means that any Senator who has a 
bona fide amendment he intends to call up must offer that amendment by 
3 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday. If he stands up and offers the amendment and 
Senators indicate a desire to debate that amendment and take action on 
it, that is OK, we can do that Monday. We can do that up until 3 
o'clock. We can get action on some amendments or we can agree to stack 
the rollcall votes, as I understand it.

  Mr. DOLE. Until 4 o'clock on Monday.
  Mr. BYRD. Where is that?
  Mr. DOLE. On page 2, second paragraph.
  Mr. BYRD. Yes.
  Now when we reach the hour of 3 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday, if Senators 
have not had an opportunity to offer their amendments by that time but 
in the meantime they have filed the amendments at the desk, they may 
offer them, have them temporarily set aside, and then they qualify 
under this agreement as having offered the amendment.
  The Senator who has the amendment offers it. If for some reason, by 
the time we reach 3 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday, that Senator has not had 
an opportunity to offer his amendment, he can offer it and, if there 
are other amendments pending at that point, he can offer it but no 
action will be taken on it. It will be temporarily set aside. But it 
has to be on the list-- I am just trying to get an understanding--it 
has to be on the list of amendments that have been read and submitted.
  I do not contemplate any great problem with this. Most of these 
things have a way of working themselves out. And Senators act in good 
faith. I take that as a given. I hope all Senators take that as a given 
with me, that I am acting in good faith. That is the only way I know to 
proceed here, is to be fair with each other.
  Mr. DOLE. I would say, if I might respond to the Senator, if there 
was some unforeseen reason a Senator on either side was unable to send 
the amendment to the desk by 3 o'clock, I think we can probably work 
that out. But, it seems to me we have all had notice and if somebody 
got up at 3 o'clock and started sending five or six amendments to the 
desk, there could be an objection to setting aside any amendment.
  Mr. BYRD. I want to say this, Mr. Leader. The leader and I have 
worked together many years in various capacities. No leader has ever 
offered as many cloture motions as I have and seen them all fail to be 
adopted.
  It is conceivable that a Senator might have a death in his family.
  Mr. DOLE. Yes.
  Mr. BYRD. I think we, being reasonable people, would understand even 
at that point that another Senator could get unanimous consent that 
another Senator could offer the amendment on his behalf.
  Looking at this, if I understand correctly, I think it is a good 
agreement. I want to compliment both leaders and all others who have 
participated in [[Page S1205]] working out this agreement. This 
preserves, this fulfills, this meets the majority's desire to know who 
really has amendments, who intends to call up those amendments and what 
those amendments are. It assures all parties on both sides that all 
first-degree amendments must have been offered, not by the managers but 
by Senators themselves.
  If I want to come over here and offer my amendment, I have no reason 
to complain when the hour of 3 o'clock on Tuesday evening next arrives.
  If I am saying anything that the majority leader thinks is not 
accurate, I hope he will say so.
  That each Senator offers his or her own amendment, all amendments 
will have been offered by 3 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday, and those 
amendments, of course, may be disposed of and they are expected to be 
disposed of as we go along. We made progress today and we hope to make 
further progress a day later.
  And then, once those amendments have been disposed of, we are not 
saying that the disposition has to occur by 3 o'clock p.m. on Tuesday. 
We are saying they have to be offered. The disposition may be 3 o'clock 
Tuesday or it may be 3 o'clock next Tuesday. Once the amendments have 
been disposed of, we advance to third reading and then no further 
amendments can be offered.
  That is the case now. Once we are on third reading, except by 
unanimous consent, no further amendments are in order.
  And then we are not closed out of debate at that point. And, of 
course, the leader, as he always has a right to do, has a right to 
offer a cloture motion. That is his right.
  So, I hope that, as a reasonable man, if we reach that point and it 
is clear that somebody wanted to debate in a reasonable time, the 
leader would be willing to let that go forward. If it is obvious that 
someone just wants to tarry and delay, nobody can quarrel with the fact 
that the leader has that right to offer a cloture motion.
  I would ask this question. Is there any time limit? You say that 
Senators will be permitted to speak tomorrow during a period for 
routine morning business. They may speak for how many minutes? Is there 
a time limit?
  Mr. DOLE. I say to the Senator, we did not put a time limit because 
some might like to speak on their amendment. Even though they cannot 
offer amendments, they might like to suggest, ``I intend to offer this 
amendment,'' and they could get rid of some of the debate tomorrow, at 
least on this side. You would have a chance to rebut that, or whatever.
  But we did not put any time limit. We had hoped they would be 
constrained if they wanted to talk about their amendment, discuss it 
for a reasonable time, and then move on.
  I want to say one other thing about the 3 o'clock deadline. 
Obviously, if there is some unusual circumstance, somebody's plane was 
delayed, we have a bad storm or something, I think the two leaders 
would agree, after consultation with each other, whoever it was on 
either side would be permitted to offer his or her amendment or 
amendments.
  Mr. BYRD. So it is not the intention of the majority leader to put a 
limitation on the time for speeches on tomorrow?
  Mr. DOLE. We could put a limitation of 15 minutes.
  Mr. BYRD. If they want additional time, they could ask for unanimous 
consent.
  Mr. DOLE. Yes.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, again, I think this is a good agreement. I 
think it is a reasonable agreement. It seems to me it protects all 
Senators' rights. It is a reasonable approach.
  I again compliment both leaders and all Senators. Many Senators have 
participated in developing this agreement. I not only compliment them, 
I thank them for their further indulgence.
  I reserve the right to object, but I have already indicated so.
  I want to say this: I hope we close this session in a good spirit. I 
was sitting here a while ago while a rollcall vote was going on and I 
thought of Paul's epistle to the Colossians and I wrote it down. ``Let 
your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye know how 
ye ought to answer every man.''
  Sometimes I have to stop and write that down and read it and try to 
apply it to myself. I find that often fails.
  I hope we will all feel good about having reached an agreement, and 
go home tonight. I think the leaders have done a good job. I think we 
have accomplished something. I am happy. I think it preserves 
everybody's rights. It is a reasonable agreement. It does not 
prostitute the legislative process.
  That is what I have been complaining about. I thank the distinguished 
leader.
  Mr. GLENN. Would the distinguished majority leader yield for a 
question?
  Mr. DOLE. Let me say that we will have people speak for not to exceed 
15 minutes to amend requests.
  Mr. GLENN. I have been asked during the business tomorrow, it says 
morning business, and speakers can speak on whatever they wish 
including their possible amendments for next week or whatever; but 
there will not be any business conducted on S. 1 directly tomorrow, is 
that correct? So there can be no misunderstanding.
  Mr. DOLE. That is correct.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the distinguished majority leader renew 
his unanimous consent request?
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, let me thank my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle and let me thank the Senator from Massachusetts for his 
persistence. I did not mean to offend him earlier. I think we have an 
agreement that satisfies most everyone on each side of the aisle.
  Mr. President, I renew my request. I ask unanimous consent the list 
of amendments be printed in the Record.
  The list of amendments follows:

                     Democratic Amendments to S. 1

       Bingaman:
       (1) Relevant.
       (2) Relevant.
       (3) Relevant.
       Boxer:
       (1) Sensitive subpopulations.
       (2) Immigration costs.
       (3) Child porn/abuse/labor exclusion.
       Bradley:
       (1) Relevant.
       Byrd:
       (1) Relevant.
       (2) Relevant.
       (3) Relevant.
       Dorgan:
       (1) Metric conversion.
       (2) Federal Reserve.
       (3) C.P.I.
       Ford:
       (1) Imposing standards on House.
       (2) Imposing standards on House.
       (3) Imposing standards on House.
       Glenn:
       (1) Relevant.
       (2) Relevant.
       (3) Relevant.
       (4) Relevant.
       (5) Relevant.
       Graham:
       (1) Immigration.
       (2) Fund allocation.
       (3) Relevant.
       Harkin:
       (1) Relevant.
       (2) Relevant.
       Hollings:
       (1) Relevant.
       (2) Sense of Senate Balanced budget.
       Johnston:
       Relevant.
       Kohl:
       Relevant.
       Lautenberg:
       Relevant.
       Levin:
       (1) Relevant.
       (2) Relevant.
       (3) Relevant.
       (4) Relevant.
       (5) Relevant.
       (6) Relevant.
       (7) Relevant.
       (8) Relevant.
       Moseley-Braun:
       Relevant.
       Moynihan:
       Relevant.
       Murray:
       (1) Hanford.
       (2) CBO.
       (3) CBO.
       Wellstone:
       (1) Relevant.
       (2) Relevant.
       (3) Relevant.

                Republican Unfunded Mandates Amendments

       McCain: Appropriations point of order.
       Gramm: 60-vote point of order.
       Gramm: Treatment of concurrence reports.
       Hatfield: Local Flex. act.
       Hatch/Brown: Judicial review.
       Hatch: FACA.
       Brown: SOS/Review of S. 1.
       Grassley: CBO vs. Actual costs study.
       Grassley: 60-vote waiver re: direct costs.
       D'Amato: Comptroller of the Currency.
       Kempthorne: Manager's technical amendment.
       Roth: Chairman's technical amendment.
       Dole: Relevant. [[Page S1206]] 
       Kempthorne: Relevant.

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I would send six amendments to the desk and 
ask that they be printed, and this be considered compliance with the 
Friday paragraph of the unanimous consent request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. DOLE. Any further business to come before the Senate?
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, if the majority leader would yield, I 
would simply send three amendments to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________