Congressional Record, Volume 147 Issue 102 (Friday, July 20, 2001)

[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 102 (Friday, July 20, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8004-S8008]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001--CONFERENCE REPORT

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, today we are considering the conference
report on H.R. 2216, the Supplemental Appropriations Act for fiscal
year 2001.
My colleague, Senator Stevens, is momentarily off the floor. He has
some constituents. He understands that we are beginning our discussions
and has indicated his willingness for me to proceed. But he will come
to the floor shortly and have some things to say also about the
conference report.
On June 1, 2001, President Bush asked Congress to consider a
supplemental request for $6.5 billion primarily for the Department of
Defense. The conference report the Senate will adopt later today totals
$6.5 billion--not one dime above the President's request.
The conference report contains no emergency designations. The
President has said he will not support such emergency designations, so
the conferees have not included any emergency designations in this
bill. Unrequested items in the bill are offset.
The conference report is the product of the hard work and cooperation
of all of the conferees, especially Senator Stevens, ranking member of
the Appropriations Committee in the Senate, and Chairman Bill Young,
the House Appropriations Committee chairman, and the ranking member of
the Appropriations Committee in the House of Representatives, David
Obey.
I cannot say enough about the cooperation of my friend and colleague,
the former chairman of the Appropriations Committee in the Senate and
now the ranking member, Ted Stevens. The word really isn't
``cooperation.'' It is better than that. It is ``leadership''--
leadership on the part of Senator Ted Stevens. Ted Stevens has been
exemplary in his cooperation and support as we have crafted this
conference report, as we have crafted this agreement in a bipartisan
and collegial way.
The distinguished ranking member is on the floor now. As I indicated
earlier, ``cooperation'' is not really the word. There is a better word
than that. The word is ``leadership.'' I compliment the distinguished
Senator from Alaska, Mr. Stevens, on his leadership in crafting this
agreement.
It was not an easy task to craft an agreement that had no emergency
designation, that offset all unrequested items, an agreement which
conformed to Senate rule XXVIII and was not one dime over the
President's request. I thank all of the conferees for their
cooperation.
The conference report includes a number of offsets to pay for
unrequested items, and Members should know--and perhaps be reminded--
that with passage of the bill, we are at the statutory cap for budget
authority in fiscal year 2001.
H.R. 2216 funds the President's defense request for a net increase of
$5.5 billion, including $1.6 billion for defense health care, $515
million for military pay and benefits, $3.25 billion for increased
military readiness, including the high costs of natural gas and other
utilities, for increased military flying hours, and for other purposes.
The conference report also includes $278 million for defense-related
programs of the Department of Energy.
While the conferees have approved the President's request for the
Department of Defense, I stress the importance of accountability for
these and future funds. Financial accountability remains one of the
weakest links in the Defense Department's budget process. This is no
criticism of the Secretary of Defense. He is a new man on the job. He
has been there before, but he inherited this. It is an accumulation
over years and years.
Recently, the General Accounting Office reported that, of $1.1
billion earmarked for military spare parts in the fiscal year 1999
supplemental, only about $88 million could be tracked to the purchase
of spare parts. The remaining $1 billion--or 92 percent of the
appropriation--was transferred to operations and maintenance accounts,
where the tracking process broke down. We must do better in making sure
these dollars that are requested for spare parts go where they are
intended.
The conference report includes report language requiring the
Secretary of Defense to follow the money and to provide Congress with a
complete accounting of all supplemental funds that are appropriated for
spare parts. I am gratified that the administration recognizes this
problem and included $100 million for strengthening the DOD financial
management systems in their recent budget amendment for fiscal year
2002.
The conference report provides $300 million for the Low Income Energy
Assistance Program, an increase of $150 million above the President's
request, to help our citizens cope with high energy costs. The
conference agreement also includes $161 million for grants to local
education agencies under the Education for the Disadvantaged Program in
response to the most recent poverty and expenditure data. Also provided
is $100 million as an initial U.S. contribution to a global trust fund
to combat AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis.
A special request was made to me by our leader on this side of the
aisle, Mr. Daschle. In conformity with his request, I worked to have
$100 million included for that purpose, and it is here in this
conference report. In addition, $92 million requested by the President
for the Coast Guard is included, as is $115.8 million requested for the
Treasury Department for the cost of processing and mailing out the tax
rebate checks.
The conference report includes $3 million for the Department of
Agriculture for inspection and enforcement activities to protect and
promote humane treatment of animals.
The American people are becoming increasingly sensitive to the
treatment of animals. In the past few weeks, in the local papers here
in Washington--the Washington Post and the Washington Times--I have
read reports of animals being processed while still alive--processed
for food products while still alive. They were not adequately stunned;
they could still feel pain. So we are trying to do something about that
on appropriations. The American people are becoming sensitive to it.
Reports of cruelty to animals through improper livestock production and
slaughter practices have hit a nerve with the American people. So this
provision attempts to address their growing concern. Additional
inspectors are being provided by moneys

[[Page S8005]]

that were added in our committee--the $3 million added for additional
inspectors to enforce the laws that are already on the books. We expect
those laws to be enforced.

The bill includes authority to make payments during fiscal year 2001
from the radiation exposure trust fund to provide compensation to the
victims of radiation exposure for individuals who were involved in the
mining of uranium ore and those who were downwind from nuclear weapons
tests during the cold war. These victims have waited for too long for
this, and I compliment the Senator from New Mexico, Mr. Domenici, and
Senator Ted Stevens for their insistence upon a proper response by the
Congress, by the Government, to the needs of these people who have been
promised assistance.
The conference agreement includes critical disaster assistance
through the Corps of Engineers and the Departments of Agriculture,
Interior, Transportation, and Defense in response to recent flooding,
ice storms, earthquakes, and other natural disasters across the Nation.
These are the kinds of items, certainly, that are eligible to be called
emergencies. These are acts of God--not the acts of man but the acts of
God--and they ought to be designated emergencies. That is what they
are. They are unforeseen and they are very costly--many times in human
lives. There has to be help, and there is a certain area of assistance
when these disasters come that can only be supplied by the Federal
Government. They cost all of the people. So there are times when there
must be items in appropriations bills that are properly designated as
emergencies. But even so, we don't have any emergencies in this bill;
no items are designated emergency. There was $473 million in the House
bill designated as emergencies but not in this conference agreement. We
helped the House to find offsets for these items.
I am particularly pleased that this supplemental bill does include
disaster assistance in response to recent floods in West Virginia.
During the weekend of July 7 and 8, communities in eight southern West
Virginia counties were ravaged by torrential floodwaters. Entire towns
were buried in mud. For many families, this latest flood came just
weeks after cleanup efforts were completed from heavy rains in May that
prompted a Federal disaster declaration. In this latest round of
devastating flooding, more than 3,000 homes were damaged or destroyed,
and the severe impact on the infrastructure in the southern part of my
State--from roads, bridges, water and sewer, to power sources--has
brought a normal way of life to a screeching halt.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture funding of $8 million is provided
in the supplemental to remove debris and obstruction from waterways and
to protect property. Additionally, $8 million is provided in the
supplemental for the Corps of Engineers to assist in the recovery
effort. FEMA estimates that its costs of cleanup and recovery in West
Virginia will be at least $180 million. FEMA funding is available
through existing appropriations, and the committee has included $2
billion for FEMA in the fiscal year 2002 VA-HUD appropriations bill. We
did that yesterday in our Senate Appropriations Committee.
I am very appreciative and grateful for the cooperation my colleagues
have demonstrated with regard to the funding that has been added, which
will accelerate the pace of recovery in West Virginia. West Virginia is
not the only State that has been hurt in this regard. But true to the
nature and character of the people of West Virginia, West Virginians
immediately began to reclaim their communities. I have seen this happen
time after time after time over the long years in which I have served
in the Senate--the mud, the muck, the misery that accompanies these
sudden storms. West Virginia is prone to these things because we have
these steep mountains that run up suddenly from the deep hollows, which
lend themselves to these sudden storms and floods.
This aid will help to repair the state's injured infrastructure and
clear the debris that has clogged our waterways.
The conference agreement does not include additional funding for FEMA
disaster relief or Forest Service firefighting programs. On July 17,
2001, OMB Director Mitch Daniels sent the Appropriations Committee a
letter which indicates that the Administration believes that these
programs have adequate funding through the end of this fiscal year. We
will closely monitor this situation and if there is need for additional
resources, we will address those needs in the fiscal year 2002
appropriations bills, which as I say we already began yesterday. We
began addressing many of these needs that exist in several States by
including $2 billion for FEMA.
In its June 19, 2001 Statement of Administration Policy on House
action on the supplemental, the Administration states that, ``emergency
supplemental appropriations should be limited to extremely rare
events.'' So I say again and again and again, this conference agreement
contains no emergency designations. I do believe that it is appropriate
for Congress and the President to use the emergency authority from time
to time in response to natural disasters and other truly unforseen
events. How rare such events may be, is up to a power greater than the
Congress or the White House. There is such a power.
Mr. President, during debate on the recent tax-cut bill, I argued
that the tax cuts contained in that bill could return the Federal
budget to the deficit ditch. I stressed that the tax cuts were based on
highly suspect 10-year surplus estimates and that if those estimates
proved illusory, the tax-cut bill would result in spending the Medicare
surplus.
While we are confronted with this problem, we on the Appropriations
Committee are very sensitive to it. We are very sensitive to it. We are
trying to be responsible. We are trying to be responsive to the needs
of the country, and I think the action by the conferees, and
particularly by this Senate and more especially by our committee, has
indicated that we know how to be responsive and we know how to be
responsible.
I thank my colleagues. Again, I thank the benign hand of destiny for
allowing me to work with a Senator of the stature of Ted Stevens. This
is not the first time I have said things like this, and it ought not be
the last time, either.
I have been on the committee 43 years. This is my 43rd year. No
Senator in history has ever served on the Appropriations Committee 43
years, other than I. I have seen chairmen come and I have seen them go
and, in the main, they have all been good chairmen.
When we are in a time such as this when we have to scrimp and save
and hold on to every penny, as it were, and I find myself chairman of
the committee, I would be an ungrateful wretch if I did not thank my
colleague, Senator Stevens, and the other members of the committee on
both sides of the aisle for my good fortune.
I thank them for my good fortune in having them on board that
committee at a time when responsibility of being chairman devolves upon
me.
Again, I say this bill has not one thin dime--not one thin dime, not
one Indian head copper penny--above the President's request; not one
penny, not one thin Indian head copper penny above the President's
request. Do you hear me down there at the other end of the avenue? We
are not one thin dime above the White House request.
I think that is something to ponder upon. This bill is within the
statutory spending limits. It is a responsible bill. I urge Members to
support it.
We had planned to have this matter before the Senate on Monday, but
the administration has indicated its need for action on this bill
today. Senator Stevens has responded. He is here at his post of duty.
We are working with the leaders on both sides of the aisle who also
have implored us to move on this, and we are doing that.
Mr. President, I shall shortly turn to my colleague Senator Stevens,
but first, we are moving just a little bit ahead of calling up the
conference report. Let me do that now.
I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the conference
report to accompany H.R. 2216, the supplemental appropriations bill;
that once Senator Stevens has concluded his remarks, the conference
report be adopted; that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the
table; and that any statements be printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

[[Page S8006]]

The clerk will report the conference report.
The senior assistant bill clerk read as follows:

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill, H.R.
2216, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed
to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses this
report, signed by all conferees on the part of both Houses.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will proceed to the consideration
of the conference report.
(The report was printed in the House proceedings of the Record of
July 19, 2001.)
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska is recognized.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I certainly commend our chairman, Senator
Byrd, for taking the action he has taken and the leadership of the
Senate, Senator Daschle in particular. We did have an urgent plea from
the military that we act today on this bill rather than wait for
Monday. We have responded to that request. It is a supplemental. It is
primarily concerned with Defense appropriations, and it is vitally
needed. We hope these supplementals will not be long needed, as Senator
Byrd has indicated.
If we plan our bills properly and they are executed properly by the
executive branch of our Government, we would not have requests for
supplementals unless because of an act of God or because of an
unforeseen event we were called upon to provide additional moneys for
the current fiscal year. This is money for this current fiscal year.
Because of the practices of the past, moneys have been diverted from
the operation and maintenance account. We tried to account for those.
It has not really been possible to account for them as much as we would
like. Senator Byrd has indicated we want greater specificity of how the
money is spent, particularly from the supplemental, so we can determine
whether they are needed in the future.
This one, I am confident, is needed. If Members of the Senate will
remember the long delays in the last part of last year and the basic
problem of utilizing some of the moneys from the O&M account, as I
indicated for peacekeeping and other matters, we have gotten into the
habit by the time we reach the fourth quarter of the fiscal year of the
Department of Defense needing more money.
We hope we are addressing that situation in the bill for 2002 so that
will not happen. I join Senator Byrd in saying we do not look forward
to holding the Senate up on Friday afternoons dealing with a
supplemental unless it truly is for an emergency or for an unforeseen
situation. This is not that bill. This is a supplemental because enough
money was not provided for the Department of Defense for the current
fiscal year. These moneys are necessary.

I do believe this conference report meets the needs as defined by the
President in the submission he made in a request for supplemental. It
was an urgent defense supplemental but not an emergency bill that we
received. As Senator Byrd said, there is no emergency money in this
bill. No account required emergency spending. It provides additional
resources for critical readiness and for quality of life and medical
programs.
At the end of the last Congress, we passed two bills, one dealing
with health care and another dealing with pay affecting the Department
of Defense. In order to fund those, they had to take money out of the
first three quarters of this calendar year and use it for the programs,
meaning the other programs, particularly the readiness programs which
are involved in the steaming hours, the flying hours, the use of tanks
in the field, the maneuvers. These cost money. This bill is to fund
those. That is why it was urgent we finish this bill today.
However, there are other priorities, some of which Senator Byrd has
mentioned. He mentioned the radiation compensation. I point out also
there is money for the new problems that have come up with regard to
the Salt Lake City Olympics, for the defense nuclear programs. I
commend Senator Byrd particularly for calling to the attention of the
committee the President's request for additional money to respond to
the international AIDS crisis. There is money here. That is a
legitimate supplemental request. It may even come under the heading of
being an emergency one of these days. It is a near world emergency. At
least we have jumped the gun and made moneys available now, which the
President actually requested for 2002, and the President has indicated
an appreciation of that action, and I am sure he will be pleased to
sign this bill.
We have started off under a new management. A slight revolution went
on here and we changed positions, but this bill demonstrates we can
work together in a bipartisan fashion. I think the supplemental
conference we had with our friends in the House, the chairman of the
House committee, Congressman Bill Young, and the ranking member,
Congressman Obey, had probably the best--there is no other word for it
than ambience, the best feeling I have had in a long time. We all
realized we had a lot to do in a short time to do it. We are behind the
curve as far as our bills are concerned. This bill came through
conference between the House and Senate in record time.
It does represent a lot of things. As Senator Byrd mentioned, there
are some things for his State, there are a couple things that affect my
State. I will point that out.
Over the Fourth of July recess, I went home and examined the area and
talked to the Forest Service about that area of our State where a
controlled fire got out of control, a fire on Forest Service lands that
actually had gone into the beetle kill area. We have an enormous amount
of our forests in Alaska that have already been killed by beetles. This
fire left the Federal lands and swooped into an area that already had
been planned for scheduled harvest of timber from State lands. We had
provided for that. It is not emergency money, but it is money to assist
the Forest Service to deal with the Kenai Spruce Bark Beetle Task
Force, allowing them to respond to the wildfires that are taking place
now in Alaska due to this problem, the enormous fire in the kill area
where the beetles have killed so many of our trees.
It also has a provision to allow funds that we
previously appropriated for the State of Alaska to construct a seed
laboratory in Palmer, our agricultural area. The law had to be changed
so that those funds could be used. The money was made available, but
there was a defect in the previous law. It makes permanent a provision
that Congress has included in previous bills recognizing those tribes
in our State of Alaska that are entitled to tribal priority
allocations, and also makes some corrections regarding legislation
previously funded, when there were banned inadvertently 11 of our crab
vessels from participating in our fishing operations.

When we handled these, we were able to make technical changes in the
law, enabling previously appropriated funds to be used as we intended
them to be used. There are several of those technical corrections in
this bill that affect my State. Again, I express my appreciation to
Senator Byrd and other members of the committee for being willing to
address those and to allow making these small changes that are
necessary so these funds already appropriated for this year can be used
this year. That is why the provisions are in this bill.
Mr. President, the Supplemental Appropriations conference report
contains two provisions that are very important to the North Pacific
fishing industry. The first provision makes changes to the American
Fisheries Act to ensure that U.S. lenders may continue to offer
financing to fishermen and fishing companies after October 1, 2001. The
second provision makes changes to a fishing vessel capacity reduction
program to ensure that all vessels which meet the standards set by the
North Pacific Fishery Management Council may participate in the Bering
Sea crab fisheries.
The American Fisheries Act, AFA, helped ``Americanize'' the domestic
fisheries by requiring that U.S. fishing vessels be 75 percent owned
and controlled by U.S. citizens at all tiers of ownership and in the
aggregate. The AFA also limits the class of lenders that may hold a
preferred mortgage on a fishing vessel to ``fisheries citizens'' who
meet the 75 percent standard,

[[Page S8007]]

state- or federally-chartered financial institutions which meet the
controlling interest (51 percent) requirement in section 2(b) of the
Shipping Act of 1916, or lenders using a mortgage trustee which
qualifies as a fisheries citizen. These standards apply to the more
than 36,000 U.S. fishing vessels in our domestic fleets. The Maritime
Administration's implementing regulations give special scrutiny to
vessels 100 feet in length or greater.
Since these regulations were promulgated, Congress has been told that
most large lenders cannot prove that they are U.S. citizens under
Marad's rules. Proof can only be made through an examination of
shareholder records, which is a practical impossibility for widely-held
companies. Shares in these lending institutions are traded thousands of
times a day, and are often held by mutual funds on behalf of the real
equity owners. The same proof problems have discouraged financial
institutions from acting as mortgage trustees.
Section 2202(a) moves the provisions defining a mortgage trustee from
Chapter 121 of title 46, which deals with vessel documentation, to
chapter 313, which deals with vessel mortgages. This will prevent the
loss of a fishery endorsement by a vessel if that vessel's mortgage
trustee falls out of compliance with the statute.
Section 2202(b) expands the class of lenders eligible to hold a
preferred mortgage to include state- or federally-chartered financial
institutions insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, farm
credit lenders, specific banks created under state law, and eligible
commercial lenders. This provision more accurately reflects the types
of lenders currently making loans to the fishing industry.
Section 2202(c) expands the class of eligible mortgage trustees to
include any entity eligible to hold a preferred mortgage directly,
provided that it also meets other requirements. Marad will specifically
analyze the trust arrangements of beneficiaries which are not
commercial lenders, or are not eligible to hold preferred mortgages
directly.
Section 2202(d) delays the effective date of these changes until 2003
to give Marad time to develop new regulations. I strongly encourage
Marad to promulgate draft regulations by March 1, 2002, and final
regulations not less than 180 days later, so that Congress may review
the new rules before they take effect. Additionally, Congress's
significant concern over foreign control of fishing vessels that led to
the AFA has not lessened since it was enacted in 1998. In promulgating
new rules that take into account the specific legislative changes made
by this provision, Marad should also take every step necessary to
ensure that foreign capital is neither impermissibly invested in nor
controlling our fisheries.
Finally, Section 2202(e) addresses commerce treaties between the
United States and certain foreign countries. After consultation with
the State Department, Marad recently determined that these treaties
exempt foreign ownership of U.S. fishing vessels from the AFA's 75
percent U.S. ownership standards. Section 213(g) of the AFA as enacted
would exempt additional foreign investments made between now and
October 1, 2001. This provision closes that window, and freezes the
foreign ownership at today's levels.
The other provision in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, section
2201, corrects an interpretation of law that inadvertently disqualified
several vessels from the crab fisheries. This provision restores the
eligibility of those permit holders which used the fishing history from
multiple vessels to meet the qualifying periods agreed to by the North
Pacific Council.
My last comment is that we have expressed a desire from our majority
leader that we try to move nine bills before the August recess. That is
2 weeks away. I am committed to try and work with Senator Byrd and
other Members to achieve that goal. I think it is important to do it,
if possible.
The fact this is a fair and balanced agreement and one that has come
out of our committees on a bipartisan basis is a harbinger of good
things ahead. I hope we can work on the other bills the way we have on
this one and demonstrate our commitment to catch up on the
appropriations process and deliver on the request of the majority
leader: that we report out and get to conference prior to the time we
leave for the August recess the nine bills that have been outlined by
the chairman.
Again, I am grateful and humbled by the comments of my friend from
West Virginia, having been my mentor for so many years. To have him
make the comments he did concerning me is a humbling matter. It is more
than a privilege to serve with Senator Byrd. It is really a great
honor. To be able to stand here now as the ranking Republican is
something I wasn't sure would ever occur to me, just as I am not sure I
would become chairman, but I fervently hope some day I might become
chairman again.
(Ms. STABENOW assumed the chair.)
Mr. BYRD. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. STEVENS. Yes.
Mr. BYRD. Upon his completing his statement, the Senate will have
acted on this conference report.
Let me refer to some things I inadvertently overlooked. One is the
splendid staff work that was demonstrated in bringing this conference
report to the floor and bringing the meeting of the minds of conferees
in both Houses, the meeting of the minds together. It was the most
remarkable display of statecraft that I have seen in my service on
committees in the Senate, the way our staffs worked.
The Senate appropriations staff on both sides is a class act, a class
act.
I thank Terry Sauvain and Chuck Kieffer and Steve Cortese. These are
remarkable men in the way they worked together and the way they worked
in the House. I want to extend the same expressions of thanks and
admiration to the House staff, Jim Dyer and Scott Lily. It is
remarkable. This is a real class act to watch. I also want to thank our
ranking members, Mr. Stevens and others on that side of the aisle, Thad
Cochran and the other Members on the Republican side of the aisle in
committee. These are fine people to work with, never a hint of
partisanship. None.
In closing, I also inadvertently omitted the name of Senator Bingaman
when I spoke about the authority to make payments during fiscal year
2001 from the reparation exposure trust fund.
I mentioned the leadership of Senator Stevens and Senator Domenici in
this area. I inadvertently overlooked the name of Senator Bingaman. He
was an original Senate sponsor of this effort. He is not on the
committee, but he certainly attends to his duties and responsibilities
toward the people of New Mexico. In this instance they can be proud of
him, likewise.
Madam President, I thank the Chair. My, ``how sweet it is,'' as
Jackie Gleason used to say, how sweet it is to serve with men and women
like we have on our Appropriations Committee.
I yield the floor.
Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I thank Senator Byrd for his comments
in honor of Terry Sauvain who is now staff director of the full
committee. This is his first bill in that capacity. This demonstrates
his basic approach, and we are blessed by his presence and knowledge,
that he also has decided to proceed, as Senator Byrd and I have, on a
bipartisan basis. He has been very gracious to all Members on our side.
I thank Senator Byrd for commenting about Steve Cortese, a brilliant
former staff director, now staff director for the minority. He really
is a key man in the Senate as far as I am concerned; and Andy Givens
here, working with me along with Lisa Sutherland; and I am pleased
Senator Byrd mentioned Senator Thad Cochran, who is here, who was a
member of our conference and has really contributed greatly to the
outcome of this bill.
It is my understanding when I yield the floor the bill will pass; is
that correct, Madam President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. BYRD. Will the Senator yield. Forgive me for asking him to yield
one more time. In speaking of our ranking member, I must not overlook
the splendid work of the paradigm of patriotism that is constantly and
consistently and always and never-endingly shown by Danny Inouye, the
ranking member of our committee on this side of the aisle, and how
fortunate we are to have, in this particular bill which deals mostly
with defense, how fortunate we are to have the guidance and the
leadership of

[[Page S8008]]

the chairman, Ted Stevens, and the ranking member, Danny Inouye of the
Defense Appropriations Committee subcommittee.
Mr. STEVENS. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. BYRD. Yes.
Mr. STEVENS. Turn that over. We have just changed seats.
Mr. BYRD. Yes. OK.
Mr. STEVENS. Chairman Inouye and Ranking Member Stevens.
Mr. BYRD. The Senator is correct. But those two, Ted Stevens and
Danny Inouye, are just like Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd. It really
doesn't make a difference. If it weren't for the fact that I am
expected, if I leave the Chair momentarily, to call on a Democrat, I
would just be as sure and as confident and secure if I turned it over
to Ted Stevens. It would not make a bit of difference to me personally.
I would say: Ted, I have to go out for a moment to see some
constituents. Would you take over?
We are fortunate, though, in having Ted Stevens and Danny as the two
key members on national defense, active at the helm in our development
and managing of this supplemental. I thank the Senator.
Mr. STEVENS. I was going to mention Senator Inouye because he
mentioned to me earlier we ought to do something to try to see if we
can get this bill finished today. So we have met Senator Inouye's
request.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the conference
report?
If not, under the previous order, the conference report is agreed to.
The motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.
Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BYRD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the
quorum call be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senator from West Virginia.

____________________