[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 81 (Wednesday, June 11, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5488-S5489]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          DISASTER RELIEF AND PREVENTING A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN

  Mr. THOMAS. Madam President, we have asked to set aside a little time 
this morning to talk about the issue the Senator from Minnesota talks 
about. Each of us wants to find a way to get help to people who need it 
as a result of the disaster. I think there are a number of issues 
involved. I believe as we move toward a solution, it is useful to talk 
about those things.
  Certainly, there are legitimate concerns on both sides of this bill. 
I am satisfied that our leadership is now putting together something 
that will be presented, hopefully that will be acceptable.
  I think it is well to recognize that we want to get this disaster aid 
out, but there are certain things that are very important, as in any 
discussion, to both sides. One of them is to get something in that 
avoids the human disaster that might well happen in the future if we 
had another shutdown of the Government. So this can be one of those 
things.
  There also has to be an understanding, of course, on an issue of 
where there are different points of view that both sides have to be 
willing to make some accommodation. The idea that somehow you can't do 
anything unless the President approves is not the system we have here. 
We have a divided Government. We have the President with authority to 
do what he does and the Congress with the authority to do what they do. 
When they come to a conflict, there has to be some movement and not 
simply a pronouncement that the President doesn't like that and, 
therefore, it won't happen. That is not the way it works.
  So, Madam President, we would like to talk a little bit about that. I 
am joined by my colleagues. I yield first to the Senator from 
Minnesota.
  Mr. GRAMS. I thank my colleague from Wyoming.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Roberts). The Senator from Minnesota is 
recognized.
  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I was very disappointed by President 
Clinton's veto of the emergency aid bill, which provided some $5.5 
billion in disaster relief nationwide, with a major portion of those 
dollars dedicated to helping to rebuild the flood-ravaged communities 
of my home State of Minnesota and also in the Dakotas.
  Having been with the President in seeing firsthand the damage and the 
despair that was caused by the flooding, I cannot believe that he was 
willing to reject our legislation to help support the people of 
Minnesota and the Dakotas as they rebuild their homes, communities, and 
their lives in the wake of the flood.
  Our legislation sent a very clear message that the people of 
Minnesota have not been forgotten by Congress during this critical 
time, but the President's veto suggests, however, that some in 
Washington need to have their memories refreshed.
  I am particularly disturbed by the fact that the President used as 
his primary excuse for vetoing the emergency flood relief bill our 
inclusion of a measure to protect flood victims in Minnesota and 
Americans everywhere from a potential Government shutdown later this 
year.
  For reasons I have repeated on this floor many times, I believe that 
delivering emergency aid to flood victims and keeping the Government 
open for business during the rebuilding process must be our twin goals 
at this time.
  Just as the emergency flood relief serves as an assurance to 
Minnesotans that their urgent needs will be met, our efforts to keep 
the Government from shutting down will also give them a guarantee that 
any budget squabbles that happen to pop up here in Washington will not 
affect our long-term efforts to help rebuild our State. And that is an 
assurance we can't afford to go without.
  By vetoing our flood relief bill, the President indicated that having 
a leg up in this year's budget debate is higher on his priority list 
than delivering flood assistance to those who need it. That was wrong, 
but, as we know, it cannot be changed. The people of Minnesota and the 
Dakotas already know how well Washington politicians can talk, and they 
don't want any more talk; they want some action.
  Stopping our work in the Senate and blocking us from taking action on 
anything accomplishes nothing. Positive, constructive action is what 
the Senate should be working on to deliver. Therefore, I urge my 
colleagues to join me in working to ensure that flood relief gets out 
of Washington and that it gets into the hands of the people of 
Minnesota and the Dakotas as quickly as possible.
  Immediately after the veto was announced, I wrote letters to Senate 
Majority Leader Trent Lott and also Minority Leader Tom Daschle. In 
that letter, I proposed a compromise I believe will help speed up the 
enactment of the disaster relief legislation, while at the same time 
allowing Congress a separate vote, without any unnecessary delays, on 
the Government Shutdown Prevention Act. In my letters to Senators Lott 
and Daschle, I proposed that they consider removing the Government 
shutdown provision from the emergency aid legislation with a specific 
time agreement for debating and voting on the two issues in separate 
pieces of legislation.
  That would allow the Senate to debate and pass both the emergency 
flood relief bill and the Government Shutdown Prevention Act on their 
individual merits, away from the political haggling that has delayed 
action on these important bills.
  I was encouraged yesterday to learn of the support for my proposal by 
Vice President Al Gore and Senate Minority Leader Daschle. Their 
announcement of support clearly shows that there is room for 
negotiations to reconcile our differences and to deliver the flood 
assistance to Minnesota and the Dakotas.
  I have also been in negotiations with the majority leader, who 
expressed his intention to consider a number of different alternatives, 
including mine, on how best to move ahead and deliver flood relief.
  I am going to continue to work closely with both Senators Lott and 
Daschle, as well as my other colleagues in the Senate, to expedite this 
process. From the events of the last 2 days, I am optimistic that the 
two sides are closer to a reasonable settlement than anyone in the 
media may be suggesting.
  Now we must take action to bridge the gap and ensure the delivery of 
emergency disaster relief and the continued protection of the American 
people from a Government shutdown.
  At the very least, my proposal has opened the negotiation process to 
move ahead on these important issues post-veto. Again, while I am 
disappointed that the President chose to veto emergency flood relief, I 
hope that he will not shut the present window of opportunity to try to 
work together to find some common ground.
  Certainly, my constituents in Minnesota, who have already suffered so 
much at the hands of the flood, cannot afford inaction.
  As flood victims in Minnesota begin rebuilding their homes, their 
neighborhoods, their businesses, and their lives in the wake of the 
flood, they need our assurance that the Federal Government will deliver 
the aid that it promised.
  Flood victims also need to know that the Government will be there 
throughout the year to meet their urgent needs as their rebuilding 
progresses.

[[Page S5489]]

  Our efforts to keep the Government open for business will also help 
give Minnesotans a guarantee that budget squabbles in Washington will 
not affect the long-term efforts to rebuild our communities.
  Now, I know we may have reached a budget agreement in overall numbers 
and terms, but a lot of the debate will continue. And there is still 
the possibility of an agreement not being reached on every part of that 
budget this fall which could lead to a possible Government shutdown. It 
has happened before; it could happen again.
  In light of that, we want to provide assurances to these victims of 
the flood this spring in Minnesota and the Dakotas that they would not 
come up short this fall, they would not face a stop in the work that 
they are trying to do in rebuilding their lives.
  Under my compromise proposal, checks would continue to go out and 
contracts would be honored this year--in spite of what happens in 
Washington. And that is an assurance we cannot afford to go without.
  In announcing the President's veto, the White House spokesman said 
that ``Americans in need should not have to endure further delay.'' I 
could not agree more with that statement.
  The people of Minnesota and the Dakotas cannot afford for 
Washington's budget politics to stand in the way of the rebuilding that 
has already begun. Now that we have a starting point, let us move ahead 
and pass the emergency disaster relief we promised. And let us do it as 
quickly as we can.

  Thank you very much, Mr. President.
  I yield back my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who seeks time?
  Mr. CONRAD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota is recognized.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, first of all, I feel I need to respond to 
the statement about the President's action. The President did not 
include unrelated items in a disaster bill. It is not his fault that we 
are in this circumstance. It is the fault of those who decided to put 
unrelated items into a disaster relief bill.

                          ____________________