[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 80 (Tuesday, June 10, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5431-S5433]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          DISASTER RELIEF BILL

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, those who are watching the activities of 
the Congress now understand that the Congress, after some delay, passed 
a disaster bill to provide disaster relief to victims, especially the 
victims of the blizzards and the floods in South Dakota, North Dakota, 
and Minnesota, but to provide disaster relief on a much broader scale 
to those who have been victims of disaster in many States around the 
country.
  The Congress did something different this time on disaster relief. In 
this circumstance, on this disaster relief bill, which is called a 
supplemental appropriations bill, the Congress decided to attach some 
very controversial provisions that don't have any relationship to the 
bill, that are totally extraneous, unrelated to the disaster bill. They 
attached these provisions that weeks ago the President said he would 
not accept.
  The result was the disaster bill became a political vehicle asking 
flood victims and disaster victims to wait: ``Hold on over there, we're 
going to have a political exercise on the disaster bill.'' And, in 
fact, this weekend, following the passage of the disaster bill by the 
Congress last Thursday night, instead of sending the disaster bill to 
the President then, this weekend it was held over in the House of

[[Page S5432]]

Representatives, and then the Republican National Committee went on 
paid radio ads in North Dakota, for example, to make a political issue 
of this so that the bill could be sent down to the President on Monday, 
so that they would hope the President would pay a political price for 
vetoing the bill.
  I don't care about one or the other. I don't care about this side, 
that side, your side or my side. What I care about are disaster 
victims, and disaster bills ought not be the product of political 
games. In any event, I ask those who would construct a political 
strategy on the disaster bill, how on Earth could you construct a 
strategy by which everybody loses? What kind of a political game is 
that, a game in which you have constructed an approach so that everyone 
loses, most especially, the losers are the victims of a disaster? 
Thousands of them this morning who woke up not in their own homes, 
because their homes are destroyed, but woke up in neighbors' homes, in 
a neighboring city, relatives' homes, a shelter, a tent, a camper 
trailer. That is where they are living. They are the first victims of a 
strategy that plays politics with disaster relief, but there are 
others.
  The other losers are all the folks in the political system. There are 
no winners here, only losers, and the biggest losers are those who can 
least afford it: victims of this disaster.
  I intend, in just a moment, to ask unanimous consent to call up a 
bill that I introduced in the Senate yesterday. It is identical to the 
bill that Congress passed providing disaster relief, except for two 
things. It takes out the two major controversial provisions to which 
the President objects. I say, by doing this, let's pass a clean 
disaster bill, pass it now, get it to the President, get it signed and 
get disaster relief to the victims who so desperately need it.
  Mr. DURBIN. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. DORGAN. I will be happy to yield for a question.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, let me say to my colleague, I can, as said 
by the President, feel your pain here, because in 1993, my 
congressional district was inundated in a Midwestern flood.
  There are many natural disasters which can befall America and a 
family. One of the most insidious is a flood. It just never goes away. 
Some disasters strike quickly, with a tornado or an earthquake or fire, 
and by the next day, people are starting to reassemble their lives and 
clean up the mess and put it behind them. A flood lingers, and as it 
lingers, I have watched family after family in my district reach a 
level of depression, then desperation. About the only thing that 
sustains them is not only all of the good neighbors and volunteers who 
come to their assistance, but the belief that this Nation stands behind 
them; that, as a family, America says, ``We will come to your aid, too. 
We will assist you.''
  It is interesting to me that during the course of our history, time 
and time again, without exception, we have said we are going to waive 
the rules, we are going to drop the politics, we are just going to 
focus on helping people. We aren't going to ask them whether they are 
rich or poor, Democrat or Republican, Independent; it doesn't make any 
difference. They are Americans, they are neighbors, they are in need.
  Let us get on with the business of being a nation of people who care 
about those in need. Why then are we going through this exercise? Why 
haven't we passed the disaster bill to help the victims of the flood in 
North Dakota and South Dakota and Minnesota, and other places? 
Unfortunately, it is because some of the leaders here believe that this 
is the kind of bill that puts pressure on the President. Send him a 
bill that he has to sign, like a disaster bill, and then like a 
Christmas tree, put on these ornaments, little things totally unrelated 
to disasters. ``Let's send this to him and, boy, we'll force his hand. 
No President is going to veto a disaster bill with homeless people. We 
will force him. We will put a provision in there that says we are going 
to violate the budget agreement, we are going to set up a new standard 
here for funding agencies.''

  What does that have to do with disaster assistance? If you were out 
of your home, if you had seen all of your Earthly belongings inundated 
with a flood, if you and your kids were huddled in some shelter, would 
you really want the Congress of the United States of America to get 
involved in this kind of political gamesmanship?
  Even worse, there is a provision in this bill that relates to the 
taking of the census. Boy, there's a real timely emergency; we better 
get on this one. Shoot, take a look, it is only 36 months from now that 
we are going to have to deal with it; 36 months away we are supposed to 
take the census. The Republican leadership said, ``Let's put a 
provision in this bill that will force the hand of the Federal 
Government when it comes to taking the census.''
  This is sad. This is really sad for so many people who have been 
victimized by this flood to now be victimized by politics on Capitol 
Hill. And it is outrageous. Senator Dorgan is correct, let us not 
violate the standard which we have established which says when there is 
a disaster and a need in America, we will rally behind the victims, our 
neighbors, our fellow Americans regardless of party label, regardless 
of agenda.
  We are losing it in this debate because the Republican leadership 
insists on amendments to this bill which have nothing to do--nothing to 
do--with disaster victims.
  I salute my colleague for his efforts. I tell you, I have been there, 
and I know what it means to go home weekend after weekend and see these 
families struggling, looking at homes that have been inundated with 
floodwater and mud, everything in their life washed away--the wedding 
pictures, everything, it's gone--and then to have to tell them, ``I'm 
sorry, another week has gone by and Congress has not met its 
responsibility.''
  I salute my colleagues. Let us hope that just for one brief shining 
moment that this body will rise above politics and support your effort 
to bring a clean disaster bill to the table, pass it today, pass it in 
the House, move it on to the President and get it signed this evening. 
We can then say to the people huddled in those shelters worried about 
their future and what they have been through that we have met our 
responsibility. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. DORGAN. Let me make two additional points----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota has 2 minutes, 
15 seconds remaining.
  Mr. DORGAN. Let me make two additional points before I propound the 
unanimous-consent request. I ask unanimous consent for an additional 2 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me read an editorial from this 
morning's Fargo Forum, North Dakota's largest newspaper in the Red 
River Valley. It is, in most cases, a conservative voice. Here is what 
they say about what is going on, how they observe what is going on in 
Congress:

       The result [of all of this] is to aggravate the tragedy of 
     the flood by extending uncertainty about relief. Last week, 
     community leaders from Grand Forks and East Grand Forks, 
     Minnesota--many of them longtime, loyal Republicans--urged 
     Congress to quit fooling around with the lives of flood 
     victims. Clean up the disaster bill, they said, so the 
     president can sign it.
       Their words were ignored. Instead, Republican congressional 
     leaders and the two governors tried to shift the blame for 
     delays on the president. In a callous display of partisan 
     arrogance, they said his veto would be the delay, not the 
     amendments.
       It won't fly here in the Red River Valley--

  The Fargo Forum says--

     where people are trying to put their homes, businesses and 
     lives back together.
       The president made it clear weeks ago: Unless the disaster 
     aid bill was clean, he would veto it. Nevertheless, 
     Republican leaders fouled up the legislation with unrelated 
     riders, knowing the president's veto was certain. So instead 
     of considering the crucial needs of valley flood victims, 
     they opted for a purely partisan agenda. The onus is on them.
       Apologists for the GOP leadership insists adding unrelated 
     matters to popular bills is routine. Maybe so.
       But the flood of this century in the valley is not routine. 
     A disaster of such magnitude is not routine. The pain and 
     destruction are not routine. The short construction season 
     for rebuilding is not routine. Surely, the least flood 
     victims can expect is for Congress to put aside its routine 
     nonsense when circumstances are this extraordinary.

  This from the Fargo Forum, not a liberal newspaper, normally speaking 
for conservatives.
  Finally, this point. There are those here who say it doesn't matter 
that we

[[Page S5433]]

have messed around with this bill because there is money in the 
pipeline; no one is being disadvantaged. I heard them spin that yarn 
for weeks.
  We kid people in our part of the country about whoppers. You know the 
whoppers: Yes, I won this belt buckle in a rodeo riding bulls; my 
pickup truck's paid for. Now I heard this other whopper: There's money 
in the pipeline. Tell that to the folks in Grand Forks.
  There is a woman living in a tent right now in Grand Forks with her 
family. There was a woman in the newspaper yesterday, she and her 
family are out of work and have been out of their home for 5 weeks 
living in a camper trailer, and they don't know when they are going to 
get back to their home and she doesn't know when she will have another 
job. Tell it to them, that there is money in the pipeline.
  Better yet, get on a plane and go out there and try to live on that 
money in the pipeline. The money doesn't exist except in this bill, and 
the bill must get passed and must be a clean bill so this aid goes to 
disaster victims, and it ought to be done now. It can be done simply. I 
introduced a bill yesterday, and I will call it up now by unanimous 
consent, and if there is objection, it means the Congress will not 
allow a clean disaster bill to pass. If not now, when?
  Let me call up a clean disaster bill where we take out the census 
issue and the Government shutdown issue and send this bill, as it was 
written by the Congress, to the President for signature.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed to Calendar No. 18, 
H.R. 581, and that all after the enacting clause be stricken and the 
text of S. 851, the clean disaster bill, be substituted in lieu 
thereof; that the bill be read a third time and passed; and that the 
motion to reconsider be laid on the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. THOMAS. There is an objection. I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, the Senators both know there are 
negotiations going on now. This performance on the floor does not help 
at all. Our leaders are talking to your leaders. They are working 
toward doing it. As a matter of fact, if you want to carry on this 
thing, there may be some time where you can do it this evening. The 
fact is, this is not the way to solve the issue. The leaders are 
meeting, and I object to the request.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I understand under a previous order that I 
have 30 minutes under my control at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. HARKIN. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, first, I rise on another topic, but I want to say to 
the Senator from North Dakota that I fully empathize and sympathize 
with him on his position. The flood about which my colleague from 
Illinois spoke a few minutes ago is the same flood that devastated Iowa 
in 1993. This Congress and the President came to the assistance of the 
people of Iowa in a very rapid measure. To this day, the people of Iowa 
talk about how rapidly the funds got out there, the Government was 
there to help. And the same thing should apply to any disaster 
anywhere. And it should apply in North Dakota also.

  I want to say to my colleague from North Dakota, he is right on the 
mark. This legislation ought to get through. The money ought to be sent 
out without all these other political ramifications. So I appreciate 
the Senator from North Dakota. Again, his position is the correct one. 
We ought to get the money through here. And we should not be loading it 
down with political considerations.

                          ____________________