[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 23, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S304]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 2491

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that Title I, 
the Agricultural Reconciliation Act of 1995, of H.R. 2491, the 7-year 
Balanced Budget Reconciliation Act of 1995, as vetoed by the President, 
be introduced as a freestanding bill; that the Senate proceed to its 
immediate consideration; that the bill be advanced to the third reading 
and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, all 
without any intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. DORGAN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I reserve the right to object, and I will 
object.
  I would like to comment on the offering by the Senator from Idaho 
under the reservation, which, as I indicated, will result in an 
objection to this request.
  The Senator from Idaho proposes that we strip from the budget 
reconciliation bill the cobbled version of the Freedom to Farm Act and 
bring it to the floor as a separate bill and deem it passed with this 
action. That is, in my judgment, not a good way to legislate farm 
policy. It follows last year's circumstances, rather than doing what 
has traditionally been done with 5-year farm bills. Instead of the 
development of a bipartisan approach in the Agriculture Committees of 
the House and Senate, and a markup in which there was bipartisan 
participation, there was a partisan writing of a farm proposal. It was 
brought to the committee with this statement, ``Here is the proposal. 
We can have a few votes if you want, but we are all going to vote the 
same way. This is what we are reporting out.'' That is what was done 
last year. This tends, in my judgment, to follow in the same steps.
  I am not ascribing any improper motives. The Senator has every right 
to do this, and I understand the purpose of it. But I am constrained to 
object, and I intend to offer a unanimous consent request on my time.
  Mr. President, at this point I object to the unanimous consent 
request.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, before the Chair puts the consideration, I 
would like to explain to the Senate that this would allow the Senate to 
once again pass the Agricultural Reconciliation Act of 1995, thereby 
giving the House their opportunity to once again enact the farm bill. 
Farmers of this country, as I have already explained, need this 
legislation now. The President has vetoed it. It is very clear he has 
vetoed this policy.
  I certainly do not agree with my colleague that this has been cobbled 
up. We have been 5 months in the making of this legislation, in 
creating these difference. I think we are moving toward planting in the 
Southern parts of our country. As I mentioned in my earlier comments, 
farmers are now sitting down with their bankers to put the farm policy 
together, or their farming programs together, for the year. And we 
certainly need legislation at this time.

                          ____________________