[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 33 (Wednesday, March 22, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1562-S1563]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST

  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, we have had an hour of general debate and 
discussion.
  On behalf of the leader, I would now like to offer a unanimous 
consent request.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to Calendar No. 
464, S. 2251, the crop insurance bill, and it be considered under the 
following time agreement:
  One amendment to be offered by the managers limited to 10 minutes and 
not subject to second-degree amendments and no budget points of order 
be in order prior to the disposition of the managers' amendment, and 
for the purposes of complying with section 204 of H. Con. Res. 68, the 
bill, as amended by the managers' amendment, be considered as the 
committee-reported bill:
  Two relevant first-degree amendments in order to be offered by the 
majority leader, or his designee;
  Two relevant first-degree amendments in order to be offered by the 
minority leader, or his designee;
  That those first-degree amendments be subject to relevant second-
degree amendments;
  That all amendments except where noted be limited to 30 minutes 
equally divided in the usual form;
  That no motions to commit or recommit the bill be in order;
  And following disposition of the above-described amendments and use 
or yielding back of debate time, the bill be advanced to third reading.
  I further ask unanimous consent that following third reading of the 
bill, the Senate proceed to the House companion bill, H.R. 2559, and 
all after the enacting clause be stricken, the text of S. 2251, as 
amended, if amended, be inserted, the bill be advanced to third reading 
and passage occur all without any intervening action or debate.
  I finally ask unanimous consent that following passage, the Senate 
insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House, the Chair 
be authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate, and the 
Senate bill be placed back on the calendar.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I object.
  If I could just explain for a moment, we have been working closely 
with a number of our colleagues, I understand, on a bipartisan basis 
from the Northeast who want to be able to offer an amendment. I know at 
least in some cases they haven't had the opportunity to see the bill 
until yesterday. So they have asked for our indulgence in working with 
them to see if we can accommodate their needs. I have indicated a 
willingness to do that.
  I noted to Senator Lott just a few minutes ago that we are close to 
reaching a procedural arrangement whereby that could be done. I am 
hopeful that we will be able to get that agreement sometime shortly. I 
have no objection to proceeding to the bill. We could certainly do 
that.
  Earlier, a suggestion was made and a unanimous consent request I 
think was offered which would allow us to go to the bill for general 
debate only. As I understand it, that was objected to. But whether we 
go to the bill without an agreement or go to the bill and seek a 
unanimous consent that would allow for a general debate, either of 
those approaches would work.
  I hope that by the end of the day we can get a unanimous consent 
agreement that would spell out in more detail, as perhaps the chairman 
has suggested, an amendment list. As I said, we are close. I certainly 
have no objection myself to moving forward, as he has suggested. I want 
to accommodate Senators who have been working in good faith to try to 
find a way in which to amend the bill, and they should be prepared to 
do that before the end of the day.
  I will object at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Crapo). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. GORTON. Mr. President, I had hoped to come to the floor today in 
support of the long-awaited, long-anticipated crop insurance reform 
bill. My colleagues, Senators Roberts and Kerrey, have toiled over this 
legislation, laboring to ensure that the risk management activities 
America's farmers will undertake are fair, affordable, and 
comprehensive.
  Instead, I understand that a few of our Democratic colleagues have 
placed a hold on the bill, while ironically, an editorial in the 
Washington Post this morning decries the 1996 Freedom to Farm Act and 
the very legislation I had hoped would pass today.
  Mr. President, nearly every major commodity group in the nation 
supports the Roberts/Kerrey bill and have, through the voices of their 
membership, called upon us to act. Instead of working to pass crop 
insurance legislation growers from across the country have been 
anxiously awaiting, we instead find ourselves once again defending the 
principles of freedom to farm.
  To use America's farmers as a pawn in an election year political 
game, at a time when the agriculture economy is in a serious state of 
flux, in my opinion invalidates their plight. When we should be passing 
comprehensive, bipartisan legislation that enhances the

[[Page S1563]]

safety net for American farmers, we instead find ourselves fighting to 
address a bill the farming community nearly overwhelmingly desires.
  As of late, farmers in the Pacific Northwest have found themselves in 
this same game far too often. At the same time the Administration sends 
officials out to Washington state claiming to provide solutions to 
these serious issues, regulators under the Clinton-Gore watch are 
working to eliminate the water, transportation infrastructure, 
chemicals, and in general the tools necessary for farmers to continue 
their livelihood.
  Last week, the Washington Association of Wheat Growers made the 3,000 
mile trip to Washington, DC to encourage me to support the crop 
insurance reform we were supposed to address today. At a time when 
check books barely balance, fuel prices are outrageously high, while 
commodity prices are low, these folks asked for our help. Unfortunately 
today, these proud and previously profitable growers must wait. They 
must wait for several folks on the other side of the aisle to make a 
political monster of crop insurance before they can receive this 
desired reform.
  Mr. President, when the Risk Management for the 21st Century Act 
finally comes before us here in the Senate, I will support the efforts 
of Senators Roberts and Kerrey, of the Senate Agriculture Committee, 
and of those voices in rural America who demand crop insurance reform.

                          ____________________