[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 164 (Monday, November 18, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8088-S8094]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014--MOTION TO
PROCEED--Continued
Cloture Motion
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before
the Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will report.
The bill clerk read as follows:
Cloture Motion
We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the
provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,
hereby move to bring to a close debate on the motion to
proceed to Calendar No. 91, S. 1197, a bill to authorize
appropriations for fiscal year 2014 for military activities
of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and
for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to
prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year,
and for other purposes.
Harry Reid, Carl Levin, Jack Reed, Angus S. King, Jr.,
Mark Begich, Richard Blumenthal, Benjamin L. Cardin,
Tim Kaine, Christopher A. Coons, Tom Udall, Sheldon
Whitehouse, Bill Nelson, Joe Manchin III, Mark R.
Warner, Debbie Stabenow, Amy Klobuchar, Richard J.
Durbin.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. By unanimous consent, the mandatory quorum
call has been waived.
The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate that debate on the
motion to proceed to S. 1197, a bill to authorize appropriations for
fiscal year 2014 for military activities of the Department of Defense,
for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department
of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal
year, and for other purposes, shall be brought to a close?
The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Alaska (Mr. Begich), the
Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu), and the Senator from Virginia
(Mr. Warner) are necessarily absent.
Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the
Senator from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the Senator from Georgia (Mr.
Chambliss), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator
from Georgia (Mr. Isakson), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), and
the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter).
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Donnelly). Are there any other Senators in
the Chamber desiring to vote?
The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 91, nays 0, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 236 Leg.]
YEAS--91
Alexander
Ayotte
Baldwin
Barrasso
Baucus
Bennet
Blumenthal
Booker
Boozman
Boxer
Brown
Burr
Cantwell
Cardin
Carper
Casey
Coats
Coburn
Cochran
Collins
Coons
Corker
Cornyn
Crapo
Cruz
Donnelly
Durbin
Enzi
Feinstein
Fischer
Flake
Franken
Gillibrand
Grassley
Hagan
Harkin
Hatch
Heinrich
Heitkamp
Heller
Hirono
Hoeven
Inhofe
Johanns
Johnson (SD)
Johnson (WI)
Kaine
King
Kirk
Klobuchar
Leahy
Lee
Levin
Manchin
Markey
McCain
McCaskill
McConnell
Menendez
Merkley
[[Page S8093]]
Mikulski
Moran
Murkowski
Murphy
Murray
Nelson
Paul
Portman
Pryor
Reed
Reid
Risch
Roberts
Rockefeller
Sanders
Schatz
Schumer
Scott
Sessions
Shaheen
Shelby
Stabenow
Tester
Thune
Toomey
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Warren
Whitehouse
Wicker
Wyden
NOT VOTING--9
Begich
Blunt
Chambliss
Graham
Isakson
Landrieu
Rubio
Vitter
Warner
The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 91 and the nays are
0. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn having voted in
the affirmative, the motion is agreed to.
The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the first
amendments in order to S. 1197, the Defense authorization bill, be the
following two amendments. First, an editorial comment. These are two
very important amendments that I think we should resolve. The
Guantanamo amendment--I think most all Democrats accept what is in the
bill. The White House accepts what is in the bill. The Republicans and
a few others want to change what is in the bill. We should have debate
and a vote on that. I think that is appropriate. Gillibrand--that is an
amendment that has received a lot of attention, and we should have that
debate now. It has received nationwide attention.
So let's start over. The reason I mentioned these two, and these two
only, tonight--I ask unanimous consent that the first amendments in
order to S. 1197 be the following: the Republican leader or designee
relative to Guantanamo and Gillibrand or designee relative to sexual
assault; that each amendment be subject to one side-by-side amendment
relevant to the amendment it is paired with; that a McCaskill-Ayotte
amendment be considered the side-by-side to the Gillibrand amendment
and the majority leader or designee have the side-by-side to the
Republican Guantanamo amendment; that no second-degree amendments be in
order to any of these amendments; that each of these amendments and any
side-by-side be subject to a 60-affirmative vote threshold; that each
side-by-side amendment be voted on prior to the amendment to which they
were offered; further, that no motions to recommit be in order during
the consideration of the bill; finally, that upon disposition of these
amendments, I be recognized.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
The Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, let me
first say to my good friend the leader that I wholeheartedly agree that
arguably the two most significant amendments and most controversial
amendments that have to be addressed would be on Guantanamo and then,
of course, the Gillibrand amendment on sexual assault. I think we
probably have different views and positions, but I think we agree that
these need to be addressed immediately.
My wish has been that we could do that and line up some of the other
amendments but at the same time put ourselves in a position where we
could have open amendments on our side. There is a great demand in our
conference to have open amendments. I would like to get to the point
where we could do that and have them somehow regulated so that they be
relative to the subject matter of the bill, S. 1197.
So that would be my concern, and for that reason I would object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I hope we can work on additional amendments
beyond these two after they are disposed of. It is an important bill.
We need to finish it before we leave here this week, and it is a big
task to do that. It is my understanding that Senator Levin, working
with the ranking member, has already had some serious conversations
about how to move forward, conferencing, preconferencing, and even
though the ranking member has been indisposed because of a medical
condition that lasted just a short period of time, he has been in touch
with his staff and Senator Levin on almost a daily basis. So I hope we
can move beyond these two amendments. I would sure like to get these
two amendments out of the way as soon as possible.
As far as an open amendment process, I think that was then and we are
here now. I am not sure that is going to happen on this bill. If we
could work something out for a finite list of amendments or something
that could help us get this done, I would be happy to be as reasonable
as I can.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, would the majority leader yield?
Mr. REID. Of course.
Mr. LEVIN. The majority leader has said we have to finish this bill
this week. If we can't make progress on amendments that we agree should
be called up and are important amendments--one coming basically from
each side, even though there will probably be votes from each side for
and against these amendments--if we can't make progress on these
amendments where everyone seems to agree we ought to start moving, I am
worried about the prospects of finishing this week. Frankly, I am
worried anyway. I am very much worried. It has to happen. We have to
finish this week or else we can't get to conference. We have to get to
conference and then come back. So I hope that in the morning perhaps
the majority leader might renew that unanimous consent request because
the objection to it is going to make it less likely we can get our bill
passed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, to the senior Senator from Michigan, the
chairman of this most prestigious and important committee, what I think
would be a real shame is if we wind up having to file cloture on the
bill as it is written. I know the committee did great work. They worked
very hard, and the vast majority of the time they did it on a
bipartisan basis to get the bill to where it is now. It would be a
shame to have to file cloture on the bill itself. I would hope that if
we have to do that, we can get cloture on it and get on with the
conference. But I am very troubled. Today is Monday, and I would be
happy to renew my request as soon as I get here in the morning, but I
would hope that the people who are working on these two important
pieces of legislation at the very least would come and start talking
about them. Everyone knows what the amendments are. They may not be
able to pass a test on every word in the amendments, but we know the
concept of the amendments. Let them come and start talking about these
amendments. To this stage, they have been negotiated and debated in the
press. Let's debate them here on the Senate floor.
Mr. INHOFE. Would the leader yield?
Mr. REID. I would be happy to yield for a question.
Mr. INHOFE. I hope the leader is aware that I have just as strong
feelings about these amendments. It is a starting place. And the leader
said we need to be talking about it. I came down today and talked about
both of these amendments at some length.
While I say we may not be in agreement with the amendments, they need
to be debated. Historically, every year since I have been here, I say
through the Chair, we have had a lot of amendments. We have always been
able to get it through--50, 51 years-- Mr. REID. It was 52, I think.
Mr. INHOFE. Fifty-two, and we are going to do it this time and I hope
satisfy some of the concerns in our caucus at the same time.
I thank the leader for his comments, and I want him to know we are in
agreement on getting to these amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, before I yield to my friend from Michigan,
there are things in this bill that are not resolved in the Defense
appropriations bill that authorize things to be done in the military
that can only be done by authorizing them. So I myself am very
concerned about being able to move forward on this bill. We do not live
in a vacuum. We have to work something out with the appropriate
committees in the House of Representatives and then have both the House
and the Senate vote. That is what conferences are all about. Time is of
the essence.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Oklahoma, my
ranking member, the ranking member on
[[Page S8094]]
Armed Services, because I know how much he wants to get to this bill. I
do not understand the objection that I know is not his personally but
comes from his side. I do not understand how we are advancing this bill
and advancing the cause of reaching debate on amendments on this bill
by objecting to move to the amendments that I think everybody wants to
debate. I do not understand how that advances any cause. I know this is
not the approach of the Senator from Oklahoma. We have a very
bipartisan committee.
Anyway, I will leave it at that. I hope in the morning we can find a
way to do what I think everybody says they want to do, which is to
begin an amendment process on this bill.
I want to end by again thanking him. He has not only had his personal
health issue, but, as the majority leader and all of us know in this
body, he has had a very tragic loss, and he is working very hard
through that. We doubly and triplely appreciate his service to this
body and his bipartisan work on the Armed Services Committee. It is
invaluable. I don't want anything that I say tonight about being
frustrated that we cannot start debate on two amendments that everybody
wants to debate in any way to imply anything other than a very positive
relationship that we have.
Mr. REID. Reclaiming my time, I ask unanimous consent to yield back
all postcloture time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is
so ordered.
The question is on the motion to proceed.
The motion was agreed to.
____________________