[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 33 (Wednesday, March 15, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2173-S2174]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007--Continued
Amendment No. 3050
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is now 2 minutes of debate equally
divided on the Santorum amendment.
The Senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, the amendment that was just offered by
Senator Murray was defeated. I hope my colleagues will support this
amendment which does not raise the cap but, in fact, expresses a strong
sentiment, a strong bipartisan sentiment that the CDBG Program should
be funded more robustly. It is at $1.3 billion. It is offset by the 920
account. But it does express a very important sentiment that this is a
high-priority program and that the appropriators should allocate more
resources than the President did in his budget recommendation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, it is unfortunate the Senate just
defeated the amendment that would actually add real money to CDBG and
allow our communities across the Nation to invest in the critical
infrastructure to bring hope and opportunity back.
The amendment we are now going to vote on is a sham, and I refuse to
be part of a continuing sham that says to all of us that we are going
to have CDBG money. Our recipients deserve a lot more. This amendment
is for show, as I quote from the Wall Street Journal of today: `` . . .
for show since no money has been added above the cap''--leaving us,
next October, November, in the appropriations bill to either fund CDBG
or cut transit and Amtrak, which I know is important to many Senators,
and many other critical housing programs.
I urge my colleagues to say no and to put a stop to this continuing
sham of amendments that do nothing for our communities that deserve a
lot better.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, do I have any time left on my amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have
been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senator was necessarily absent: the
Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Coleman).
Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Minnesota (Mr.
Coleman) would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. Dayton)
is necessarily absent.
I further announce that if present and voting, the Senator from
Minnesota (Mr. Dayton) would vote ``nay.''
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 60, nays 38, as follows:
[[Page S2174]]
[Rollcall Vote No. 44 Leg.]
YEAS--60
Alexander
Allard
Allen
Bennett
Bond
Brownback
Bunning
Burns
Burr
Byrd
Chafee
Chambliss
Clinton
Cochran
Collins
Cornyn
Craig
Crapo
DeMint
DeWine
Dole
Domenici
Enzi
Frist
Graham
Grassley
Gregg
Hagel
Hatch
Hutchison
Isakson
Johnson
Kyl
Landrieu
Lieberman
Lincoln
Lugar
Martinez
McCain
McConnell
Murkowski
Nelson (FL)
Nelson (NE)
Pryor
Roberts
Rockefeller
Santorum
Sessions
Shelby
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Sununu
Talent
Thomas
Thune
Vitter
Voinovich
Warner
NAYS--38
Akaka
Baucus
Bayh
Biden
Bingaman
Boxer
Cantwell
Carper
Coburn
Conrad
Dodd
Dorgan
Durbin
Ensign
Feingold
Feinstein
Harkin
Inhofe
Inouye
Jeffords
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lott
Menendez
Mikulski
Murray
Obama
Reed
Reid
Salazar
Sarbanes
Schumer
Stabenow
Wyden
NOT VOTING--2
Coleman
Dayton
The amendment (No. 3050) was agreed to.
____________________