[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 27 (Thursday, March 4, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2253-S2254]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    ORDERS FOR MONDAY, MARCH 8, 2004

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the 
Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 12 noon, Monday, 
March 8. I further ask unanimous consent that following the prayer and 
pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings 
be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their 
use later in the day, and the Senate then begin consideration of the 
fiscal year 2005 budget resolution, if available, as provided under the 
previous order. I further ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding 
the Senate's adjournment, it be in order for the Foreign Relations and 
Budget Committees to file legislation from 10 a.m. to 12 noon tomorrow.
  Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, this has been a difficult week from many 
perspectives. We had two contentious pieces of legislation, and we 
certainly understand that on this side. As far as the legislation now 
before the Senate, it should not be such. I think there is no question 
that the majority of the Senate by far wants to pass the legislation 
that has been before the Senate today and yesterday.
  The issue that is now holding up this legislation is whether the 
Senate is going to vote on an overtime amendment that is being offered 
by Senator Harkin. It is an issue that we feel strongly about on this 
side. We want to vote on whether the President should go forward with 
these regulations. We want to vote. We will take a half hour evenly 
divided, we will take 20 minutes evenly divided to get a vote on this 
amendment. We are not stalling for time.
  This is something that will have to be dealt with sometime during the 
next month or so in this legislature. We are willing to work in any way 
to cooperate and get this bill done, but one of the things we can't do 
is not have a vote on this overtime issue. Senator Daschle and I have 
talked with Senator Harkin on four occasions at my last count. We said: 
Senator Harkin, don't offer this amendment; this legislation is 
important; we are trying to get it passed. He has reluctantly agreed 
every time not to move forward with this legislation.
  That is no longer part of what we are able to do. We talked with 
Senator Harkin. He has been such a gentleman as to how we proceeded on 
this. He will continue to be a gentleman, but he is not going to relent 
offering this legislation because we do not think he should anymore.
  I say that with the full knowledge that on this very important piece 
of legislation we are willing to vote, we are willing to discuss the 
amendments that Senators Grassley and Baucus have. They want to improve 
the legislation. I think they can do that, and I think their amendments 
will be supported.

[[Page S2254]]

  The second-degree amendment now before the Senate is not a bad 
amendment. I think the tax credit should be extended to sun and 
geothermal, but this extends it to wind. That is certainly a small bite 
of the apple that needs to be done.
  I know the obligations and the burdens of the majority are difficult. 
We, not too long ago, were in the majority, and it is very hard to move 
legislation through this body. We need a vote on this overtime issue, 
and we hope and we are going to press as hard as we can to get a vote 
on it sometime in the near future.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, there is no objection then?
  Mr. REID. No objection whatsoever.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, let me say to my friend from Nevada, we 
fully understand the minority or, for that matter, any Member of the 
Senate has a right to offer a nongermane amendment to an underlying 
piece of legislation, but we had an unfortunate experience earlier this 
very week in which the offering and the adoption of amendments 
unrelated to the underlying bill ended up killing the bill that both 
the Senator from Nevada and myself had hoped would pass.
  We already had one vote on the overtime issue late last year. I do 
not know how many times the minority would like for us to repeat that 
vote.
  It is the belief of this Senator that on a bipartisan basis Senator 
Grassley and Senator Baucus would like to pass the FSC/ETI bill without 
any unrelated amendments on it. There is some resistance on this side 
of the aisle to repeatedly voting over and over again on amendments 
upon which we have already had a vote.
  That having been said, I fully understand what the Senator is saying, 
that they would like to have a vote on the overtime issue. I don't 
think that is necessarily the view of everyone on that side of the 
aisle but may well be the view of the majority on that side of the 
aisle.

                          ____________________