[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 90 (Tuesday, June 18, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6407-S6408]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I am sure that we all have high standards
for accuracy on this floor, and therefore I wish to comment on certain
statements which have been made in recent days.
On June 7, the junior Senator from Oklahoma mistakenly represented
that
[[Page S6408]]
the Senate had voted on a version of the balanced budget amendment in
the 103d Congress that was ``identically the same'' as the version
voted on in the 104th Congress. He then mistakenly inserted into the
Congressional Record copes of two resolutions when he represented to be
``the two resolutions that we voted on * * *.''
In fact, he inserted into the Record copies of the resolutions as
introduced, but not as amended and actually voted on by the Senate. The
two resolutions which were ultimately voted on contained language
differences concerning judicial review.
The distinguished Senator from North Dakota and I had a colloquy with
the Senator from Oklahoma. As we pointed out then, the language
differences were not the primary reasons for our votes in opposition to
the balanced budget amendment in the 104th Congress. Our opposition
stemmed mainly from the dramatic change in the interpretation of
section 6 of the proposal concerning implementing language--regarding
the intention to count the annual surplus in the Social Security trust
fund. However, since the Senator from Oklahoma was attempting to
portray the issue in a simple black-and-white fashion--as two votes on
identical proposals--we sought to clarify for the Record that the
representations he made were flat out wrong.
Last Friday, the junior Senator from Oklahoma again took the floor to
discuss this matter. He stated that, after all, the two resolutions
really were ``exactly the same thing'' since both added language
dealing with the issue of judicial review. Therefore, even though the
language was different, certain Senators ``turned right around and
actively opposed the same exact language in a balanced budget
amendment'' that they had earlier supported in 1994.
The junior Senator from Oklahoma then quoted the distinguished
Senator from Georgia, Senator Nunn, who authored a 1995 amendment on
judicial review. What the Senator from Georgia actually said on
February 28, 1995 was that his amendment on judicial review was
``similar to the Danforth amendment we agreed to last year and the
Johnston amendment, which was defeated last week'' by a vote of 47 to
52.
I ask unanimous consent that the Danforth amendment from 1994 and the
Johnston and Nunn amendments from 1995, each of which amends section 6
of the balanced budget amendment, be printed in the Record at this
point.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Danforth Amendment
The power of any court to order relief pursuant to any case
or controversy arising under this Article shall not extend to
ordering any remedies other than a declaratory judgment or
such remedies as are specifically authorized in implementing
legislation pursuant to this section.
____
Johnston Amendment
The judicial power of the United States shall not extend to
any case or controversy arising under this article except for
section 2 hereof, or as may be specifically authorized in
implementing legislation pursuant to this section.
____
Nunn Amendment
The judicial power of the United States shall not extend to
any case or controversy arising under this article except as
may be specifically authorized by legislation adopted
pursuant to this section.
Mr. FORD. As the Senator from Georgia noted, all three amendments are
similar. The Senator form Oklahoma says the Danforth and Nunn
amendments are ``exactly the same thing.'' Yet last year he voted
against the Johnston amendment, which also dealt with judicial review.
Perhaps the next time we are discussing identical proposals on the
balanced budget amendment, the junior Senator from Oklahoma can inform
all of us concerning what was so different about the Johnston amendment
on judicial review to justify his different positions. I would think he
would consider it to be the same exact language. The junior Senator
from Oklahoma continues to try to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
____________________