[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 86 (Friday, June 26, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7296-S7297]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 2610

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we turn to 
Calendar No. 273, H.R. 2610, the reauthorization of the drug czar 
office, and immediately following the reporting by the clerk, the 
chairman be recognized to modify the amendment, the committee 
substitute; that there be 30 minutes for debate to be equally divided 
with no amendments or motions in order. I further ask that following 
the conclusion or yielding back of this time, the Senate proceed to 
immediate adoption of the committee substitute to be followed 
immediately by third reading and final passage, all without intervening 
action or debate. And, finally, I ask unanimous consent it be in order 
for me to ask for the yeas and nays on passage at this time.
  Mr. FORD. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, there are 
some who had hoped to offer some amendments. They were in the process 
of trying to work these amendments out where they would be agreeable. 
That has not transpired yet. So, then, on behalf of this side, I 
object.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I must object. I object because what the 
majority leader proposes is to add a very significant piece of 
substantive drug legislation relating to the crack-powder cocaine 
sentencing issues.
  I note that the Judiciary Committee has not reported this 
legislation. This legislation is subject to significant debate. For 
example, the costs of the most recent proposal offered by Senators 
Abraham and Allard are very significant.
  According to the Justice Department--the 5-year cost estimate to our 
federal prison budget is more than $790 million. The 10-year estimate--
more than $1.9 billion.
  This is just one example of the significant policy implications of 
this proposal. Frankly, the Judiciary Committee must be given the 
opportunity to report this legislation before we debate this on the 
floor.
  In contrast, we have fully debated the drug director legislation 
introduced last summer. The Judiciary Committee has debated it, the 
committee held hearings, the committee developed a bipartisan re-
authorization bill, the committee reported the bill last November, 
since then we have worked with Senator McCain and the Armed Services 
Committee to work out their issues with this bill.
  The bottom lines--we have a bipartisan, fully debated, bill; and we 
need to get the drug director's office re-authorized.
  There are many particular, specific drug policy issues to debate. 
Crack-cocaine is just one of them. Youth drug abuse, youth violence, 
drug interdiction, and many more all need to be debated.
  But, let's keep our eye on the ball, and let's re-authorize General 
McCaffrey's office. The General needs our support.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I should note we had at least one very 
important amendment that a Senator wanted to offer on this side of the 
aisle to this bill, too, dealing with the penalties for the use of 
powder cocaine. Certainly, it is a very important issue, and I would 
like it to be considered, but I called upon that Senator--actually it 
was two Senators--and said you will have a chance to offer that on 
other legislation including State, Justice, Commerce. He was willing, 
then, to agree to put it aside.
  I really think we need to reauthorize the drug czar office. I am 
hoping this is not the final word on this. Maybe we can work out 
something in July to consider it. But our problem is, we are really 
running out of time. I think it is going to be unconscionable if we 
can't find some way to quickly reauthorize the drug czar's office. We 
will have to do it without it taking up more than just a couple or 3 
hours, because we just don't have the time, when you look at the 
appropriations bills and everything else we are going to need to do.

[[Page S7297]]

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I understand what the majority leader is 
saying, what he is trying to do. But if he continued to push these 
amendments over to a piece of legislation at a later time, then you are 
going to have all these amendments that are waiting, and your 
colleagues will want to bring them up, and then your colleagues will be 
asked not to bring it up on that one.
  So we go through here with this constrained time that we find 
ourselves with, and the inability to bring amendments. I understand 
what the majority leader wants to do. I have no fault with what he is 
trying to do except we are trying to work out some amendments that we 
think are important. Just like your side, we are going to let ours try 
to work them out.
  So I will object.
  Mr. LOTT. I understand that. I know every individual Senator can 
demand his or her right to offer amendments. But I would have to say, I 
am very concerned that the Senate is getting more and more into a 
position where we try to rewrite or write bills on the floor of the 
Senate. One of the basic tenets I was told about when I came over to 
the Senate is, if you have a bad bill, don't think you are going to fix 
it on the floor of the Senate. When you have something like a drug czar 
reauthorization--I know there are a lot of drug-related amendments that 
are sort of pent up and Members want to offer them, but it seems to me 
we ought to just reauthorize that office--it is not a big, complicated 
bill--and allow the drug czar to do his job.
  But we will keep working and hopefully find a way to get a limited 
amount of time and limited amendments on that issue.

                          ____________________