[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 87 (Monday, July 6, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7344-S7348]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 
             INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1999

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report S. 2168.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 2168) making appropriations for the Departments 
     of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and 
     for sundry independent agencies, commissions, corporations, 
     and offices for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1999, 
     and for other purposes.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that full floor 
privileges be granted to Carrie Apostolou, a member of the subcommittee 
staff, during the consideration of S. 2168, the fiscal year 1999 VA-HUD 
appropriations bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BOND. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I am pleased to present to the Senate the fiscal year 
1999 VA, HUD, and independent agencies appropriations bill, S. 2168. 
This legislation provides a total of $69.986 billion in discretionary 
budget authority and $80.78 billion in outlays, and an additional $23 
billion in mandatory spending for veterans programs.
  The Subcommittee allocation was about $750 million below the 
President's request in budget authority. In

[[Page S7345]]

addition, there were some significant shortfalls in the President's 
budget in such areas as veterans medical care and elderly housing. In 
attempting to balance all the competing demands, we were forced to make 
a number of tough decisions.
  The committee did its best to provide the needed funding for the 
important priorities within the bill, with the highest priority given 
to veterans programs and elderly housing. Other priorities included 
maintaining environmental programs at or above current year levels, 
ensuring adequate funds for our nation's space and science programs, 
and providing adequate funding for disaster relief. The committee also 
met the commitment we made to provide the necessary funding to cover 
all expiring section 8 contracts.
  On balance, I believe the recommendation is fair and balanced. Not 
everyone is happy, but I believe it is equitable. Clearly, we were not 
able to provide fully what each member requested--and I should note 
that we received about 1,000 requests from Members of this body for 
items in this bill--but we attempted to meet the priorities.
  Before describing what is included in this legislation for each 
agency, I want to thank Chairman Stevens for all his support, and I 
particularly thank my ranking member, Senator Mikulski, for all of her 
hard work and cooperation in putting this legislation together. This is 
always a difficult task, and it is made for easier and more efficient 
by the professional and wholehearted cooperation of Senator Mikulski 
and her staff--Andy Givens, David Bowers, and Bertha Lopez. I extend my 
thanks to them. Their contributions to this process have been 
invaluable.
  Mr. President, for the Department of Veterans Affairs, the committee 
recommendation totals $42.5 billion, including $19.2 billion in 
discretionary spending. This is an increase of $373 million above the 
President's request. The amount recommended includes $222 million more 
for medical care, $53 million more for the state home construction 
program to reduce the large backlog of priority projects, and $79 
million in additional funds for other construction programs.
  The additional funds are intended to ensure VA medical care is the 
best possible quality, and that it is available to as many eligible 
veterans as possible. The funds are also intended to ensure VA 
facilities are adequately maintained, safe, and seismically secure, and 
that the final resting places for our fallen heroes are maintained in 
an appropriate and dignified manner.
  The recommendation also includes an increase of $10 million above the 
President's request for VA research, for a total of $310 million.
  This is a critical program, veterans research, in improving the 
quality of VA care, in furthering our understanding of such illnesses 
as gulf war syndrome, in developing prosthetic devices and other items 
which will improve the quality of life to veterans and others, and in 
seeking cures to diseases which veterans and the Nation at large face. 
The programs is also key in the recruitment and retention of top-notch 
medical staff at VA hospitals.
  For the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the committee 
recommendation totals $24.1 billion, an increase of $2.66 billion over 
the fiscal year 1998 level.
  This means we have been able to fund HUD programs fairly while 
meeting our commitment to provide the needed funding for all expiring 
section 8 contracts and by more than fully funding the section 202 
elderly housing program at $676 million, an increase of $31 million 
over the fiscal year 1998 level and an increase of $576 million over 
the President's request of $109 million.
  I emphasize that the section 202 Elderly Housing Program is the most 
important housing program for elderly, low-income Americans, providing 
both affordable, low-income housing and supportive services designed to 
meet the special needs of the elderly. This combination of supportive 
services and affordable housing is critical to promoting independent 
living, self-sufficiency, and dignity while delaying the more costly 
alternative of institutional care. Section 202 elderly housing is more 
than just housing--it is a safety net for the elderly, providing both 
emotional and physical security and a sense of community. I am very 
disappointed and puzzled by the administration's failure to propose the 
needed funding for the section 202 program.
  Moreover, at the direction of the Senate and House VA/HUD 
Appropriations Subcommittees, GAO conducted a very thorough budget 
investigation of the HUD section 8 accounts. Based on the GAO budget 
scrub and after discussions with HUD, we discovered that the 
administration's request for $1.3 billion in section 8 amendment 
funding is unnecessary for fiscal year 1999 and that a further $1.4 
billion in section 8 project-based recaptures may be considered excess 
funding, which means we are actually above the President's request for 
HUD.
  These additional funds have provided us with needed flexibility to 
fund HUD programs as well as to fund other priorities throughout this 
bill. As a result, the committee has provided additional funding for 
HUD programs such as the HOME program, CDBG, Youthbuild, the HOPE VI 
program, and the Homeless Assistance Grants program. I think these all 
are needed additions that were made available as a result of this 
review by GAO and work with HUD.
  Nevertheless, HUD continues to be a troubled agency with GAO 
designating the entire agency as ``high-risk.'' In fact, HUD is the 
only agency ever to have received a ``high-risk'' designation agency-
wide. Now, Secretary Cuomo has begun implementing the HUD 2020 
management reform plan as his first step to agency reform and 
downsizing. Many of our future funding recommendations will depend on 
the success of this plan and I want to state my support of the 
Secretary in his efforts to reform the Department. Nevertheless, we 
expect to see tangible and quantifiable results. We need to know that 
HUD programs work, that HUD staff are capable of effectively 
administering HUD programs, and that there is accountability within HUD 
programs.
  Further, we also do not look to fund new HUD programs and initiatives 
until HUD can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Congress its 
ability to administer effectively its primary programs. I want to make 
it very clear that self-serving press releases by HUD that announce 
success carry little weight. I am from Missouri and I want to be shown.
  Finally, for the first time in a number of years, this bill would 
provide modest increases in the FHA mortgage insurance limits, raising 
the floor from 38 percent of the Freddie Mac conforming loan limit, or 
some $86,000, to 48 percent of the conforming loan limit, or some 
$109,000, and establishing a new ceiling for high-cost areas from the 
existing 75 percent of the conforming loan limit, or some $170,000, to 
87 percent of the conforming loan limit, or some $197,000.
  I know for some that this is considered controversial, but we have 
tried to strike a reasonable balance and I believe that the new limit 
is needed especially in non-urban areas where the price of new housing 
has escalated beyond the capacity of first-time homebuyers to use FHA 
mortgage insurance to buy a house. In my own state I have seen many 
areas where, because of the FHA lower limits, financing is not 
available for construction of first homes for families of workers with 
lower wages.
  Nevertheless, I remain concerned about HUD'S capacity to manage the 
FHA mortgage insurance programs and will be looking for additional ways 
to ensure the solvency of the mutual mortgage insurance fund.
  For EPA, the bill includes $7.4 billion. This is about $50 million 
more that the fiscal year 1998 level. The bill maintains level funding 
or provides some increases to all EPA programs, reflecting the priority 
we have placed on environmental protection activities. Included in the 
recommendation is $350 million more than the President requested for 
state revolving funds, which he had proposed to cut by $275 million. 
The SRFs help to meet a need in excess of $200 billion nationally for 
water infrastructure financing. Cleaning up waste water and assuring 
safe drinking water should be at the top of our environmental priority 
list.
  The committee has provided 80 percent of the administration's request 
for the clean water action plan, including $180 million for nonpoint 
source grants

[[Page S7346]]

and $106 million for water quality grants. The committee's action 
recognizes the importance of addressing polluted runoff and seeks to 
ensure that our Nation's rivers, lakes, and streams are protected from 
polluted runoff, and are clean for recreation and for wildlife. These 
funds gives the states the tools they need to improve the quality of 
our Nation's water. I promised Administrator Browner I would try to 
find more funds for this critical program, and I have.
  The bill includes level funding for Superfund. Given the myriad 
problems with this program, coupled with the lack of a reauthorization 
bill, an increase simply was not warranted. I remind my colleagues, 
with respect to the fiscal year 1999 advance that was provided in last 
year's bill for Superfund, those funds were to be made available only 
if the program was reauthorized. We had a deal with the administration 
on this, and unfortunately the administration conveniently seems to 
have forgotten this deal.
  Further, the program continues to be listed by GAO as high risk, 
subject to fraud, waste and abuse. Such abuse recently was demonstrated 
in an IG report which found that Superfund was being used to rebuild 
homes at several times their market value. Finally, experts agree that 
funds invested in Superfund yield less reduction in risk to human 
health and the environment compared to other EPA programs.
  Our recommendation totals $13.6 billion for NASA, an increase of $150 
million above the request to ensure adequate funds for space station 
and other critical NASA programs. It also includes a restructuring of 
the NASA appropriation accounts to improve fiscal accountability.
  In particular, we have included a new account for the International 
Space Station to ensure that Congress and this subcommittee gets honest 
figures for the ISS from the administration
  While I strongly support the ISS and the many important programs 
administered by NASA, the long history of space station overruns 
reached a new and unprecedented level with the recent release of the 
report by the independent cost assessment and validation team headed by 
Jay Chabrow. The Chabrow report estimates that the ISS will cost some 
$24.7 billion instead of $17.4 billion and will take up to 38 months 
longer to build than NASA's current estimates.
  For NSF, the recommendation includes $3.6 billion, an increase of 
about $220 million above the 1998 level. NSF is an investment in the 
future and this additional funding is intended to reaffirm the strong 
and longstanding support of this subcommittee to scientific research 
and education.
  Finally, for FEMA, there is a total of $1.3 billion, including $846 
million in disaster relief and about $500 million in nondisaster relief 
programs. The amount recommended for disaster relief, coupled with the 
$1.6 billion provided in the fiscal year 1998 supplemental, 
approximates the 5-year historical average cost of disaster relief in 
1999 dollars.
  The recommendation includes the restoration of $11 million in state 
and local assistance grants to state emergency management agencies. It 
also includes $25 million in the new pre-disaster mitigation program.
  Mr. President, as you know, the administration last month submitted a 
budget amendment to increase funds for FEMA counterterrorism 
preparedness activities.
  I intend to work with my ranking member, Senator Mikulski, to offer 
an amendment to increase funds for such activities in FEMA by $8 
million, in addition to the $9 million currently included in the 
committee mark. These are critical activities. I think it is important 
we accommodate the administration's request, and I ask for my 
colleagues' attention to this very important measure. We think not only 
the work that goes on in FEMA, but the work that goes on elsewhere in 
the Federal Government, needs to take account of the risks that we face 
in these areas.
  Mr. President, that concludes my statement. It is a pleasure to turn 
to my ranking member, Senator Mikulski. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I thank the chairman.


                         Privilege of the Floor

  I ask unanimous consent that during consideration of S. 2168, the 
fiscal year 1999 VA-HUD appropriations bill, Ms. Bertha Lopez, a 
detailee from HUD serving with the committee, be provided the privilege 
of the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Collins). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, once again, we are on the floor to 
bring to the U.S. Senate for its consideration the appropriations on 
VA, HUD, and independent agencies. I thank Senator Bond for his very 
hard work and the bipartisan approach to producing this bill.
  I also acknowledge his professional staff and the collegial and 
cooperative way in which they have worked with my staff to bring this 
bill to the floor. It is this type of bipartisan effort that I think 
focuses on results, not rhetoric, meeting our obligations to important 
constituencies, like veterans and the elderly, and yet creating 
opportunities for people, like we are in FHA and VA mortgages, national 
service, and various other empowerment things we do. No one Member or 
party will get everything they want in this bill, but we do believe 
that this really does meet compelling human needs. Given the spartan 
allocation for the subcommittee and the need to make up cuts in 
programs, like housing for the elderly, I believe that this legislation 
is very solid. I strongly support it and encourage those on my side of 
the aisle to do so.
  This bill shows our commitment to both high touch and high tech. We 
have kept our high-touch commitment to our veterans and the elderly and 
the high-tech commitment to science in agencies like National Science 
Foundation, the space agency, and EPA.
  Let me talk a minute, though, just after the Fourth of July, about a 
constituency that truly does rely on the U.S. Senate for promises made, 
promises kept, and that is the veterans. The veterans of America rely 
on us, and I believe that Senator Bond and I have worked to scour every 
line item to be sure that the promises made to the veterans of the 
United States of America for their health care have been promises kept.
  This year, we will be funding veterans health care at the amount of 
$17.2 billion. That is ``b'' like in Barbara, not million, like ``m'' 
in Mikulski--$17.2 billion, and with the way we have been able to view 
the bill, this is a $200 million increase.
  Also, we want to improve VA medical research. The Veterans' 
Administration, through their excellent medical services, does an 
astounding amount of medical research, particularly the applied 
research that goes to hands-on clinical practice. In this budget, we 
have increased VA medical research by $38 million, to the tune of $310 
million, and this will go to focus on research affecting aging 
populations, like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, special needs of 
veterans, particularly those related to orthopaedic injury, surgical 
practice, and other improvements in clinical practice, to improve 
health care and shorten stays and not skimp.

  Also, as everyone here knows, as a champion of the women's health 
agenda, I wanted to be sure, working with Senator Bond, that we did not 
forget the men of this country. There is a special set-aside in here 
for research on prostate cancer, so that we can find a cure and we can 
find better early detection methods. We, the women of the Senate, as I 
know the Presiding Officer feels, want to show the men of America we 
are squarely on their side.
  I thank Senator Bond for going over this budget so that we could work 
to establish VA medical care, VA medical research, and also, at the 
same time, increase funding for something called veterans State homes. 
``State home'' is an old-fashioned word. It comes out, really, of the 
Spanish-American War and out of World War I, where we had ``old-age 
homes'' for veterans. We are now at the end of the old century and 
moving to a new one, and State homes really now are long-term care and 
rehabilitation facilities for our veterans, but they are unique 
partnerships between the Federal Government and the State government, 
forming Federal-State partnerships to establish long-term care 
facilities, maximizing our dollars to operate it and even help build 
it, but State resources in purchases of land. This way, we stretch out 
the Federal dollar and the State

[[Page S7347]]

becomes a stakeholder. I think this is a unique way of meeting the 
long-term care needs of our veterans population.
  While we were working to make sure promises made to the veterans were 
kept, we also, I think, had an excellent approach to the Housing and 
Urban Development Department. Particularly, I am impressed with the 
fact that we worked very hard, again, on a bipartisan basis in 
restoring the $489 million cut to elderly housing. HUD's elderly 
housing program is one of the more successful housing programs at the 
agency. It works with nonprofit organizations and faith-based 
organizations. The HUD 202 Program leverages those community resources 
that help provide safe and decent housing for the elderly and a sense 
of community in many communities around the country.
  The agency proposed close to a half-billion-dollar cut, and I am 
pleased that in the budget deliberation and now in our own 
appropriations, Senator Bond and I joined hands, joined forces, to make 
sure that we restored that cut so that the elderly of this country can 
have the 202 Program building housing for them and operating those 
programs.
  We also rejected with vigor the desire to take a substantial part of 
the housing for the elderly and convert that into vouchers.
  The Presiding Officer, I know, is on the Select Committee on Aging, 
and I know both in her home State of Maine and in her role in the 
Senate, she has been devoted to the cause of the elderly. She knows, as 
Senator Bond and I, that you cannot take an 80-year-old lady with a 
walker who is frail elderly and give her a voucher to go out in a 
community to find her own housing.
  Can you see her going up three flights of stairs with her voucher and 
her walker to see if the bathroom is fit for duty? We are not going to 
have the elderly of America going door-to-door with vouchers trying to 
find housing to meet their needs. That should be done through housing 
for the elderly, the 202 funding, housing for the elderly that is run 
primarily by nonprofit and faith-based organizations--Jewish charities 
and Catholic Charities in my own community. That is what the elderly 
want.
  Guess what? In this bill, we restored the $489 million, and I am 
really proud of the way we did that.
  In addition to looking out for the elderly, we wanted to look out for 
the young people of our community.
  We wanted to promote first-time home ownership. That is why we also 
looked at the FHA loan limit, recognizing that some parts of our 
country are very high cost. And we raised the FHA loan limit to 
$197,000 in high-cost areas and $108,000 in more modest areas. The 
administration proposed raising the limit to $227,000 for all 
communities. We believe that that is too high.
  We were deeply concerned about FHA foreclosures, that people would 
get into too much debt too early in their lives and end up not with an 
opportunity but with a heartbreak, and leaving the taxpayer with the 
liability. So we did not want heartbreak for the family and we did not 
want heartburn for the taxpayer. So we believe that this is a 
reasonable compromise, to raise it at this rate. It is critical that we 
ensure that FHA is able to meet the new market realities without 
setting ourselves up for this big buck unfunded liability in the event 
of FHA foreclosures.
  We also included language directing HUD to consult with Congress 
further before beginning its bulk sale of foreclosed properties. We do 
not want these houses to go at fire-sale prices or to end up adding 
blight to a community. We want to make sure that FHA is a tool for 
first-time home buyers, not a tool for neighborhood deterioration.
  We are also pleased that in this bill we really tackle the issue of 
brownfields. Brownfields funding is both in the HUD part of the bill as 
well as in the environmental protection part. The President requested 
$90 million for EPA's brownfields program. And $25 million of the 
request is provided for HUD's brownfields program.
  I happen to be a strong supporter of brownfields programs, and I 
think they are important tools to communities. They enable us to take 
care of areas that have a level of contamination and move them to clean 
up and redevelop them. My concern is that we will not get a Superfund 
authorization. And while we are waiting for Superfund funding--a great 
opportunity in our communities--brownfields that are not nearly as 
contaminated, with good gall and good appropriations, we can move 
brownfields to green fields, opening up opportunities for economic 
development.
  This then takes me to talking about EPA. Our bill provides critical 
resources for the Environmental Protection Agency at $7.4 billion. This 
is an increase of $51 million over last year. This is primarily in the 
areas of improving water quality, which are very important to a State 
like my own. It also includes last year's level of $1.5 billion for 
Superfund.
  This bill also contains money for State and tribal assistance grants, 
providing critical resources for States' efforts to maintain clean and 
healthy water.
  Madam President, water quality is absolutely crucial, and part of the 
funding is $20 million for the Chesapeake Bay program to continue our 
commitment to protect this natural resource. This Chesapeake Bay 
program was started by my predecessor, Senator Charles McC. Mathias, a 
distinguished Republican from the State of Maryland. Senator Sarbanes 
and I have kept that commitment. And we thank Presidents Ronald Reagan, 
George Bush, and Bill Clinton, and now the Republican leadership of 
this committee, for working to keep that commitment going.
  We were also hit by something called an algae bloom. Now an algae 
bloom in my State is called pfiesteria. I understand that the Senator 
from Maine, the Presiding Officer, has also been hit by algae bloom in 
her own State. We know Senator Faircloth and Senator Helms have had it 
in North Carolina. We have had pfiesteria in Maryland; you have had 
problems in Maine; the Louisiana Senators have had it.
  This algae bloom is now a national problem, and we have put over $37 
million in the EPA budget to begin to do the water quality monitoring 
and the research so that we can solve not only our problem in Maryland, 
but we also look forward to working with our colleagues, like yourself, 
in really dealing with this, because this could destroy our waters and 
it could destroy our mutual economies. Again, we look forward to 
working with you. This $37 million we think is a very important step in 
research and monitoring and trying to get good science and the best 
practices from EPA and environmental agencies in this.
  I regret that this year we do not have the authorization for the 
Superfund. Year after year, people want to reauthorize the Superfund 
site on appropriations and leave it to us to solve a problem that the 
authorizing cannot. I join in agreement with Senator Bond that we need 
the reauthorization of the Superfund site before we can move ahead on 
this bill.
  I know the administration is looking at additional sites for us to be 
able to clean up while we are waiting for authorization. I talked to 
Administrator Browner, and I said, if you have the sites, show us the 
money and get us also the authorization so that we can see how we could 
move forward.
  In the area of science and technology, I thank the chairman for 
working to increase both the funding of the national space agency as 
well as the National Science Foundation. In addition to increasing 
funding for the National Science Foundation, I am particularly pleased 
with the increases in informal education programs that will be 
important and also those in K through 12.

  Now, why is this important? Because so much of getting our young 
people excited about science goes on through informal education 
programs. These are not spontaneous playground programs; these are 
structured afterschool activities.
  In my own State, they are going on in the Maryland Science Center, 
the aquarium. I wish you had been with me during the break. I was at 
something called the Christopher Columbus Center, a marine biotech 
center. We have second graders there every day from 9 until 2. They do 
science in the morning; they do reading in the afternoon; and they are 
so excited. And when they go back then to the classroom, they are going 
to be much more reading ready and they are going to be excited about 
science. And, by the way, I got to do a few experiments myself.
  In terms of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA has been

[[Page S7348]]

doing an outstanding job. I think FEMA has been doing an outstanding 
job, and we provided $1.3 billion to the agency, $500 million over the 
request. We also have provided a modest amount for predisaster 
mitigation, which I hope, as the bill moves forward through conference, 
we can actually increase because of the approach to preventing 
disasters.
  In my own State, Allegheny County has gotten a $700,000 grant, and we 
have worked with the Corps of Engineers and the Governor. We are well 
on our way to protecting communities that normally are hit.
  Now, in this legislation also there is $9 million for FEMA to have 
resources to do the training necessary to prevent us from terrorist 
attacks due to weapons of mass destruction. Senator Bond and I are 
working to increase that funding. I know it started out even more 
spartan than this. But, Madam President, we really have to worry that 
the predators in the world--be they nations or terrorists--are really 
going to once again try to spread weapons of mass destruction on the 
United States of America. I know that the military is standing sentry, 
our intelligence agencies will give us the warning, but we need to look 
out for our civilian population. I think we need to have the type of 
training at the local level that we can be able to move in this bill.
  Let me also thank the chairman for including money for national 
service, which does provide the opportunity for so many people to 
volunteer in our own communities, at the rate of $425 million, last 
year's request.
  And let me close by saying there are two independent agencies--the 
Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, which we funded at $60 million, 
that I think specific amounts of money are absolutely out there in poor 
communities and near-poor communities doing a good job. Also, our 
Consumer Product Safety Commission has gotten out of the rhetoric 
business under its able administrator Ms. Brown and really is giving 
much needed advice on consumer product safety. Most recently, she has 
been helping with the whole issue of a particular type of blanket which 
could cause the death of preschoolers.
  This is our bill. It goes from funding Arlington Cemetery and the 
Consumer Product Safety Agency, to protecting us against national 
disasters, to honoring our commitment to veterans, to protecting the 
environment, and promoting science. This is one of the most interesting 
and exciting bills and subcommittees in the U.S. Senate. I believe the 
chairman and I have done an outstanding job in trying to get real value 
for the taxpayer and for the Nation in this bill. I hope that this bill 
moves forward and that our arguments have been so compelling that there 
won't be any amendments and we can pass this bill by tomorrow 
afternoon.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. BOND addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri is recognized.
  Mr. BOND. Madam President, I thank my distinguished ranking member 
for her very cogent and persuasive arguments. She makes an excellent 
case for the bill.
  I note when she says this is an interesting bill that there is an old 
curse that one should live in interesting times. But we are very 
fortunate to be able to work on a bill that has so many important 
programs and is of such great interest among our colleagues.
  I want to begin the debate. Before I turn the floor over to our 
colleague from Ohio, who I understand has other business, I urge all of 
our colleagues to please come forward if they have amendments, if they 
have colloquies. It would really help us if we could get as many of 
those in today as possible in order for us to complete work on this 
measure by tomorrow afternoon, which would be my hope.
  I know we have two amendments that are going to be argued with some 
enthusiasm and with great feeling on both sides. I hope we can complete 
those. In order for us to do that, I ask that all Senators who have 
amendments that might be cleared or colloquies which they wish to enter 
with us, they provide them by no later than the Tuesday lunches 
tomorrow so we may have an opportunity to look at them. If we get near 
the end it would be my desire to finish up, once we have dealt with the 
controversial amendments, and I would hate to have to turn down an 
amendment that might otherwise be agreed to because it is not presented 
in a timely fashion. In order for us to move forward with this bill so 
we can expedite the work of the Senate, I ask colleagues bring to us 
this afternoon, if possible, and tomorrow morning in any event, any 
amendments or colloquies or other matters it wishes to consider so we 
can complete work on them in as quick a fashion as possible.
  I yield the floor.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I wish to echo the request of Senator 
Bond. I say to all my Democratic colleagues, if you have an amendment, 
please let us know by noon tomorrow, preferably even by 10 o'clock 
tomorrow morning so we could have discussions with you and perhaps find 
other ways to resolve their, I am sure, very legitimate concerns.
  Also, we ask our colleagues to cooperate with us in a time agreement. 
There are many bills waiting to come to the floor. We have very few 
days left in July. We are ready to move our bill.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. GLENN. Madam President, I want to compliment Senator Bond and 
Senator Mikulski for the hard work they have done on this bill. I know 
personally of their efforts in this regard. I certainly support the 
tack they have taken and look forward to taking part in the debate as 
it continues over the next couple of days with regard to this matter.
  I wish to speak today on a different matter. I ask unanimous consent 
we proceed as in morning business for the duration of my speech, which 
will not be beyond about 15 minutes, and then revert back to VA and 
HUD.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GLENN. I thank the Chair.

                          ____________________