[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 30 (Thursday, March 7, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Page S1633]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             THE SMALL BUSINESS REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I understand that someone from the 
majority will be coming to the floor to offer a unanimous-consent 
request that has to do with a number of matters pertaining to our 
schedule for next week. While he is on his way, let me simply explain 
the dilemma that requires our objection to moving at this time to the 
Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Act.
  We have no objection to the substance of this particular bill, with 
the understanding that some technical details remain to be resolved. I 
am quite confident that if all we had to do was to consider the bill, 
after only a short period of time for debate and adoption of a 
managers' amendment to clarify some technical questions with the bill, 
we would then be in a position to vote, I would suspect unanimously, 
for that particular legislation.
  The dilemma is that the bill will very likely be used as the vehicle 
for another very big debate, unlimited debate, over the whole issue of 
comprehensive regulatory reform. That issue has been before the Senate 
for weeks already during this Congress. Several attempts to invoke 
cloture were made and failed. We could thus find ourselves in much the 
same set of circumstances again next week were comprehensive regulatory 
reform legislation offered as an amendment to this bill.
  My concern is that the Senate has many important and timely issues 
facing it. We have a debt limit extension bill, the continuing 
resolution, the Whitewater resolution and a number of other issues 
pending. I would be very concerned if this body found itself mired once 
more in an impasse over comprehensive regulatory reform, with no real 
hope of coming to some consensus, some compromise.
  We are getting closer. I think at some point there may be an 
opportunity to bring a bill to the floor. But we are not there yet. I 
think that rejoining this debate at this time on this bill would most 
likely undermine what possibilities there are for regulatory reform.
  So bringing regulatory reform to the floor under those circumstances 
would not be what I view to be a very constructive exercise. But it is 
not my objection this afternoon that will cause the bill not to be 
scheduled. There are objections within our caucus, and I respect those 
objections. They are being made for legitimate reasons.
  So we will continue to try to resolve these outstanding difficulties 
and come to some resolution at some point in the future. But until the 
broader issues relating to this particular bill are resolved, we would 
not be in a position to go to the bill.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________