[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 18, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2250-S2251]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Unanimous Consent Request

  I have a bill at the desk to improve the regulation of certain 
vessels, and I ask unanimous consent, as in legislative session, that 
the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration, that the bill be 
considered read a third time and passed, and the motion to reconsider 
be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action 
or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The Senator from South Dakota.
  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, let me just 
make one correction for the record that my friend, the Democratic 
leader, brought up earlier and which has been alluded to by the Senator 
from Washington.
  The issue was a matter under the jurisdiction of the Commerce 
Committee, and for the information of the Senate, this part of the bill 
has been introduced as a stand-alone bill. Senate bill 168 was referred 
to the Commerce Committee and not the EPW Committee, and the chairman 
of the Environment and Public Works Committee agrees with that. So this 
argument that somehow this is not under the committee's jurisdiction is 
one I would raise as an objection to the request of Senator from 
Washington.
  Secondly, as I think the Senator from Washington knows, we have 
worked tirelessly with every member of our committee on both sides of 
the aisle and Members off the committee. Furthermore, I think we have 
accommodated every request the Senator from Washington has made on this 
bill, and we have involved her in all these discussions. My 
understanding was that as a result of that consultation and those 
discussions on the bill, she was going to vote in favor of the bill.
  Now what she wants to do is take out those pieces of a very carefully 
negotiated bill that she doesn't like and pass just the provisions that 
she likes. It would be great if, here in the U.S. Senate, we could all 
do that. But that doesn't happen around here.
  We carefully negotiated this, with great input from the Senator from 
Washington, and it was my understanding that the Senator from 
Washington was going to vote for this package. I object to picking out 
the pieces

[[Page S2251]]

that we like and not working with the collaborative process that has 
involved both Republicans and Democrats, both on the committee and off 
the committee, to bring a bill to the floor that enjoyed 65 votes in 
support until this afternoon. Politics is being played here--pure and 
simple, nothing more, nothing less, nothing else.
  I object to the Senator's request.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Washington.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, who I know 
considers the efforts of the Commerce Committee as great, hard work, 
and I appreciate his hard work. As I mentioned, I did not support the 
bill as it came out of committee.
  I know there are things we are trying to work on to keep this process 
moving. But I would say to my colleague, the small vessel discharge 
bill has been something that has been part of an exemption process 
related to this for a long time. It has been considered many times 
over. Our fishermen need the certainty of this.