[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 109 (Friday, June 30, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9595-S9596]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        THE RESCISSIONS PACKAGE

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, with respect to the rescissions package, I 
regret we were unable to pass that, were unable to complete action on 
the rescissions package because it was something that had broad support 
on both sides of the aisle, support by the President.
  The President very much wanted to have it done before this Fourth of 
July recess. As I indicated earlier, the Senator from Minnesota, 
Senator Wellstone, and the Senator from Illinois, Senator Carol 
Moseley-Braun, were within their rights to block action on the bill.
  But I must say, as I listened to their statements in which they 
wished they 

[[Page S9596]]
could have offered their amendments, they had about 3 hours to offer 
amendments and used all that time and just had a discussion of the 
amendments and what was wrong with the bill.
  And I am not certain when the rescissions package will be back for a 
vote. Unless there is an agreement on that side of the aisle I will not 
bring it back up on the Senate floor. As soon as the President can 
persuade my Democratic colleagues that this bill is necessary, it is 
important, and it ought to be passed, and I do not see any reason to 
take any further time of other Senators because we have a lot of 
important legislation.
  But keep in mind, again this bill which was blocked contains money 
for the Oklahoma City disaster, it contains money for California 
earthquakes, it contains money for 39, I think 39, States which 
suffered disasters, including the States of Illinois, and maybe 
Minnesota. I am not certain.
  So, while the Senators have every right to make their point about 
certain programs they do not agree with, this rescissions package had 
been the subject of long discussions, long debate, and even after it 
passed the Senate and the House, was vetoed by the President; more 
debate, more discussion by the White House and Democrats and 
Republicans on each side of the aisle.
  So I hope when we come back we will have an agreement that we can 
take it up immediately, and have an up-or-down vote on the bill itself 
without amendments.
  I would say again there was certainly every opportunity by either the 
Senator from Illinois or the Senator from Minnesota to offer all the 
amendments they wanted to offer today. They refused to offer 
amendments. So I proposed I would offer their amendments. I asked 
consent to offer their amendments. And they objected.
  So I do not want the record to reflect that somehow they were somehow 
disadvantaged and did not have an opportunity to offer their amendment. 
That was not the case. They had plenty of time and could have offered 
the amendments. We could have been finished with that bill by now, and 
a lot of people around the country would have felt a lot better about 
it.
  So I do not know how they explain it. But that will be their problem.
  

                          ____________________