[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 148 (Wednesday, October 29, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11322-S11323]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 1998, CONFERENCE REPORT
Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I now ask unanimous consent that the
Senate turn to the consideration of the DOD authorization conference
report, and it be considered as having been read.
Mr. DASCHLE. Reserving the right to object.
Mr. GRAMM. Reserving the right to object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas is recognized.
Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I sought recognition.
Mr. GRAMM. Madam President, if I might have the indulgence of the
majority leader to try to explain where we are, and I will do it very
briefly.
We have before us a bill that would take 17 hours to read. It has 30
pages in it that are aimed primarily to prevent competition from
occurring in defense. In preventing competition from occurring, it will
cost the taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and it will prevent
private contractors--some of whom might use facilities at Kelly Air
Force Base in Texas or might use facilities at McClellan Air Force Base
in California, or might use other facilities anywhere in the country--
from competing.
Despite the fact that we have a bill that would take 17 hours to
read, despite the fact that we have 30 pages of language which is
primarily aimed at preventing this competition, in working with the
Defense Department and with the White House, we have come up with 1
page of changes that if it could be made in technical corrections to
the language of the bill, then we would happily get out of the way and
let the bill pass.
The President, who is committed to veto the bill--and I put his
letter in the Record--would then gladly sign the bill. So the point I
would like to make is that while we are here to resist to the best of
our ability--and we will resist--that we are only a few changes away
from the ability to move ahead with a bill that not only could we pass
this afternoon but that the President could sign.
It is my understanding that there may be other technical language
changes related to an amendment that
[[Page S11323]]
Senator Domenici wrote that was adopted by the Senate, and then
subsequently was technically changed by the staff. Senator Domenici is
seeking to get a technical change to correct this mistake. I think if
you look through the 30 pages of depot language--what the Leader is
looking at--you can see that we are asking for hardly any changes, but
that these are changes the Secretary of Defense and the President
believe are critical to their ability to operate the Defense Department
efficiently and to meet the national security needs of the country.
So, while we are here today to obstruct, we are willing, with just a
few changes, to allow the bill to go forward, and in the process we can
get a guarantee that the President will sign the bill.
So I would like to urge my colleagues to work with us to correct this
30 pages of language which is aimed at preventing competition.
So, while we obstruct, we hope to make progress.
And, based on that hope, I object.
Mr. LOTT. Under his reservations, would the Senator withhold on his
objection, and allow me to make a comment and ask a question?
Mr. GRAMM. Certainly.
Mr. LOTT. Madam President, if he would yield for a response, I
understand that these few changes are about 30 pages.
Mr. GRAMM. No.
Mr. LOTT. I have been notified by four Senators that they have
objections.
Mr. GRAMM. Those are the 30 pages in the bill. The only changes we
are making are the changes that are written in black ink.
Mr. LOTT. Let me just say I have worked with this issue, as the
Senator knows, and the other Senator from Texas, over the last 2 or 3
years. I know there are other Senators that have an interest in it and
have different views. I know a mighty effort has been made on all
sides. This is not a partisan issue. It is a difficult issue between
some States, though, to try to resolve it.
I really felt like we were never to bring it to a head until we get
this legislation started. That is my intent here. We are going to get
it started off.
I have discussed with Senator Daschle the possibility that we at some
point--we met this afternoon--we meet to see what else can be done. I
am certainly willing to continue to work with both sides to try to find
a resolution.
But we are running out of time in this session. This is a very, very
important bill for national defense and the security of our country.
So I thought we should go ahead and get started. And hopefully that
will cause us to try to find some way to resolve this one remaining--
one remaining--very difficult issue to resolve.
I thank the Senator for withholding so I could make that comment.
Mr. GRAMM addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the minority leader seek recognition?
Mr. DASCHLE. I do, Madam President. But I would be happy to allow the
distinguished Senator from Texas to complete his remarks.
Mr. GRAMM. I was seeking recognition, Madam President, both to
complete my remarks, and to object. If the distinguished minority
leader wanted to speak before I objected, I would be glad to withhold.
Mr. DASCHLE. I appreciate the accommodation of the Senator from
Texas.
Madam President, just very briefly, because the distinguished
majority leader made some comments relating to the ISTEA bill, let me
just say as succinctly as I can, there is a difference between
desirable outcome and an essential outcome. A 6-year bill certainly is
desirable. I have long favored a 6-year bill with my full support. But
a 6-month bill is now essential. House leaders have said they are not
taking up the desirable bill. They are taking up the essential bill--
the 6-month bill that bridges the two legislative sessions to
accommodate our Nation's highway, transit and safety needs. We have
come to the recognition, given our current circumstances, that the
essential bill may be all we can do.
So I do think it is important as we consider these bills to recognize
that there is a difference between essential and desirable. We
recognize the importance of getting the essential work done. That is
the reason we would support this afternoon taking up that bill.
I again appreciate the accommodation of the Senator from Texas.
I yield the floor.
Mr. GRAMM. Madam President, I object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard to the unanimous-consent
request.
____________________