[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 208 (Thursday, December 2, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8900-S8904]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Government Funding

  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, it is my hope that soon the Senate might be 
able to vote on a bipartisan agreement to keep the government open and 
funded through February 18.
  I know both parties are working on that agreement right now. I wish 
those who are doing it good luck. I have certainly been working hard 
with the Appropriations Committee to help on that as have others. In 
fact, the only thing

[[Page S8901]]

worse than running the government under a continuing resolution, a CR, 
is a government shutdown. A shutdown only hurts the American people. We 
know last time we had one, it wasted billions in taxpayer dollars.
  And with the agreement that I anticipate, I am glad that the bill 
will include critical funding to support Afghan refugees as we help 
them get resettled here in the United States. These brave women and men 
were our allies through 20 years of war. We have an obligation to 
support them as they begin their new lives.
  I am not giving this speech as some kind of a victory lap. We are 2 
months into the fiscal year, and we appear no closer to getting an 
agreement on full-year appropriations bills.
  Now, if we vote on this, which I hope we will soon, we are buying 
time to complete these negotiations, and we have to complete these 
negotiations. It is not a matter of whether we should; we have to. But 
in order to complete these negotiations, we have to begin them. We have 
to have both sides represented at the table. My Republican colleagues, 
to this day, have not come to the table. I have been talking to many of 
them, and I am hoping they will because the American people deserve 
better than that from their elected officials. They expect to see both 
Democrats and Republicans sitting down negotiating--no matter how we 
vote in the end, that we are working on coming to something that will 
be voted on.
  On October 18, nearly a month and a half ago, Senate Democrats 
released a comprehensive offer in an effort to jump-start these 
negotiations. We wanted to let all Senators--both parties but 
especially our Republican colleagues and the American people--know our 
values. Since then, it has been very, very quiet. We haven't heard any 
response.
  Let me tell you about our offer. I believe the offer was fair. I 
talked with Senators across the political spectrum. We provided a 5-
percent increase for defense programs compared to last fiscal year and 
a 13-percent increase for all other programs. I took that 5 percent 
because it is exactly the amount passed by a 25-to-1 vote by the Senate 
Armed Services Committee. It certainly is significantly higher than the 
1.7-percent increase for defense proposed by the Biden administration, 
and the amount is lower than the 16 percent the administration proposed 
for nondefense programs, even though I would like that 16 percent. But 
it is called compromise. We took from one; we gave to the other. It is 
compromise. It is how you get things done. Nobody gets every single 
thing they want, even if you are chairman of the Senate Appropriations 
Committee.
  As I mentioned earlier, the 5 percent wasn't something I picked out 
of thin air. It was the exact amount contained in the fiscal year 2022 
National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA, that is before the Senate 
this week and again reported from the Senate Armed Services Committee. 
I think it was 24 to 1, but it was overwhelming.
  The work on that bill has fallen due to Republican obstructionism 
over a series of amendments. To be clear though, none of the amendments 
Republicans are fighting for on the NDAA would increase total spending 
in the bill. That is because the 5-percent increase has bipartisan, 
bicameral support--Republicans and Democrats, both in the House and the 
Senate. That is the percentage they agreed to. Republicans unanimously 
endorsed the 5-percent increase when the NDAA was marked up in the 
Senate Armed Services Committee. And the 5-percent increase passed 
overwhelmingly in the House when they considered the NDAA over 2 months 
ago.
  I have been here for 47 years. This is as close to consensus as we 
can get--unanimous and near-unanimous votes. So I have to ask, why not 
take yes for an answer? If I was a cynical person, I would think this 
delay was deliberate. If I was a cynical person, I would think this 
delay was meant to drive us into a full-year continuing resolution. If 
I was a cynical person, I would think that because some in the 
Republican Party have even expressed this desire out loud.
  But for a party that claims to care about our Nation's defense, I 
suggest they do the math. A full-year CR would not only reduce defense 
spending instead of increasing it, it would reduce it by $37 billion 
compared to the levels set forth in the NDAA that they voted for 
unanimously. Actually, it would cut defense spending below last year's 
level.
  So stop the hyperbole. Stop the rhetoric. Deal with the reality. I 
have to ask those Republicans who are advocating for a full-year CR is 
their support for our Nation's security merely political theater? I 
hope not because what they are asking for is a tremendous cut in 
defense, not an increase.
  But also I look at the nondefense area. The impact a full-year CR 
would have on American families in all corners of this country is 
equally unthinkable. Housing, education, childcare, critical healthcare 
programs--every one of these are at risk under a full-year continuing 
resolution. I can't possibly imagine that any Senator of either party 
is going to go home and say: Oh, I support huge cuts in housing, 
education, childcare, critical healthcare programs. I cannot possibly 
believe that is an outcome the other side would endorse, but that is 
what they are asking for in a CR.
  Every week, it seems I receive letters from advocacy groups and 
industry associations--both those normally associated with Republican 
positions and those normally associated with Democratic positions--and 
they all say the same thing. They detail the problems that would come 
from the full-year CR and ask us to do our job and enact full-year 
bills. Among those, they include the National Defense Industrial 
Association, the Aerospace Industries Association, numerous veterans 
groups--all groups we say we support.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that four of these letters be 
printed in the Record at the end of my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LEAHY. These four letters and others expressing concern can be 
found online at https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/download/
advocacy-and-industry-group-letters.
  Let me be clear. Refusing to come to the negotiating table undermines 
national security and inhibits our ability to invest in American 
families, impedes our capability to respond to the coronavirus and what 
we now see as emerging variants--which I am sure the Presiding Officer 
hears in his State, I hear in my State, and I guarantee you in the 
other 48 States, every Senator is hearing about that concern.
  But also there are 100 of us. We are elected to represent the whole 
country, 325 million Americans. We are elected to do our job. If we 
don't do it, it is irresponsible. That is the reason we are here today 
kicking the can down the road another 2 months.
  Let's stand and vote yes or no on these issues. We have a job to do. 
The bill we will soon vote on, which I expect will be coming over soon 
from the House, gives us roughly 2 months to do it, and that is plenty 
of time.
  But I would ask the Republican leadership to step up and engage, and 
I hope they will do it in the next few weeks.
  I am prepared any day--any day, any weekend, any evening, any 
morning, whenever--if we could do this. Otherwise, we are going to be 
back here February 18, and the American people, no matter what party 
they belong to, are going to say: What are you folks doing? Where is 
this legislation?
  So when the bill comes over, I urge my colleagues to vote aye on the 
bill, but I urge my Republican colleagues to work with me and with the 
House to ensure that we do not have to pass another one in February.
  I have talked with Members of the Republican Party and the Democratic 
Party. They will tell me privately they are willing to work, they want 
to work, and they want to get it done. I appreciate that, but now is 
the time to step up and do it. I think we can. I hope we will.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                  National Defense


                                       Industrial Association,

                                  Arlington, VA, November 1, 2021.
       Dear Chairman Leahy, Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking Members 
     Shelby and Granger: On behalf of the thousands of companies 
     represented by the National Defense Industrial Association 
     (NDIA) and across the defense industrial base, we write to 
     request

[[Page S8902]]

     the expedited completion of the defense appropriation bill. 
     While we applaud the bipartisan effort to pass a continuing 
     resolution (CR) and avoid a government shutdown, it is a poor 
     stand-in for the full-year appropriations desperately needed 
     by our warfighters and those who provide them with the 
     equipment and services that enable their mission.
       We cannot stress enough the importance of the defense 
     appropriations bill to our national security and to a healthy 
     defense industrial base. The limbo caused under CRs wastes 
     precious time and money our nation cannot recover. Delayed 
     new starts and initiatives place a strain on companies and 
     their workforce, particularly as they recalibrate operations 
     to a post-pandemic normal. Our nation's competitors face no 
     similar challenges putting us at a competitive disadvantage, 
     particularly with emerging technologies, and place our supply 
     chains at increasing risk, something we cannot afford after 
     the nearly two years of pandemic impacts.
       Doing business with the Federal Government is already hard. 
     The tomes of regulations, burdensome business requirements, 
     sometimes Kafkaesque contracting and oversight procedures, 
     and compressed margins have combined to drive businesses out 
     of the defense sector with a net outflow of well over 10,000 
     companies since 2011 and, as noted in our annual Vital Signs 
     report, a halving of new entrants to the sector between 
     fiscal 2019 and fiscal 2020 alone. Add to that the 
     uncertainty of ``if and when'' a full-year defense 
     appropriations gets signed into law, more companies will 
     reassess their participation in the defense industrial base. 
     The ultimate price of this is paid by our warfighters who 
     will lose out on innovations and new capabilities not 
     delivered.
       The inefficiencies caused by beginning 12 of the last 13 
     fiscal years without full-year funding have cost the military 
     services billions lost in inefficient expenditures and 
     program delays. Also, delayed contract starts challenge 
     larger contractors while threaten the existence of smaller 
     prime contractors and small businesses down the supply chain. 
     The effect of that has a human face and a long-term impact. 
     To execute a new-start contract, a company must recruit, 
     hire, and train a workforce despite a tight labor market and 
     a shortage of workers with the required security clearance. 
     Faced with a delayed start, that company must now choose 
     between two bad options, either pay that workforce to stand 
     idle or let those workers go-both of which could lead to 
     contract or business failure and undelivered capabilities to 
     our service members.
       With no full-year funding, we cannot afford to go too long 
     without hampering readiness recovery efforts, delaying 
     capabilities to our warfighters, and postponing investments 
     in advanced technologies while allowing our defense 
     industrial base to erode. NDIA supports a bipartisan 
     agreement on domestic and national security spending and 
     encourages the adoption of a two-year budget to prevent 
     another year of budget instability and to provide the needed 
     support to the Department of Defense for their critical 
     missions.
       We appreciate your attention to this critical issue and 
     look forward to working with your Committees moving forward.
           Very respectfully,
     Herbert J. Carlisle,
       General, USAF (Ret), President and CEO, National Defense 
     Industrial Association.
     Arnold L. Punaro,
       MajGen, USMC (Ret) Chairman of the Board, National Defense 
     Industrial Association.
                                  ____



                             Aerospace Industries Association,

                                                 November 2, 2021.
       Dear Majority Leader Schumer, Speaker Pelosi, Ranking 
     Member McConnell, and Ranking Member McCarthy: The United 
     States aerospace and defense industries are an essential 
     partner with the federal government in an array of efforts 
     vital to our economy and our national security. Each fall, 
     that partnership is tested when those programs are slowed 
     down or deferred by the use of multiple continuing 
     resolutions (CR) to keep the government running. On behalf of 
     our vital industries and our more than two million employees, 
     the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) strongly urges you 
     to reach a near-term agreement on fiscal year 2022 funding to 
     avoid further CRs beyond December 3, 2021.
       Government watchdogs continue to document the waste and 
     unnecessary disruption that CRs cause to federal programs. 
     Multiple agencies advised the Government Accountability 
     Office (GAO) in a 2021 report that longer CRs ``contributed 
     to distortions in agencies' spending, adding to the rush to 
     obligate funds late in the year before they expire.'' The GAO 
     determined that contracting officers working under a CR must 
     continuously align the period of performance under their 
     contracts to the specific timeframe of a given CR, resulting 
     in many unnecessary contract modifications during the year. 
     Hiring of new civilian staff is also delayed, making it 
     harder for agencies to meet their goals. The GAO notes that 
     agencies apply creative workarounds in the first quarter of 
     each fiscal year, because they assume that appropriations 
     bills will not be in place by the beginning of the fiscal 
     year. However, these effects become far more serious, and 
     agency staff have fewer options, when CRs continue into the 
     second quarter and beyond.
       The Department of Defense (DOD) is uniquely harmed under 
     CRs because these bills typically prohibit DOD from starting 
     new programs or activities or increasing any program's 
     production rate beyond that of the current fiscal year. Both 
     `new starts' and rate increases are critical for our national 
     defense because our defense posture and threats are always 
     evolving. As CRs extend to longer periods during the year, 
     this is an increasing problem for which DOD seldom gets 
     relief. DOD reported to the GAO that between FY10 and FY20, 
     they had requested exceptions to CR language (called 
     ``anomalies'') 1,258 times and had only been granted three 
     percent of those requests. Most of these requested relief 
     from the prohibition on new starts and rate increases. We 
     strongly believe that, should Congress produce CRs extending 
     into the second quarter of FY22, it should eliminate the 
     prohibition on new starts and production rate increases.
       FY22 is the first year in a decade when discretionary 
     spending levels have not been fixed in statute by the Budget 
     Control Act. AIA has long argued that statutory caps are not 
     needed because Congress and the administration are able to 
     assess and address the needs of the nation more effectively, 
     and with greater oversight, through the annual appropriations 
     process. Last year, Congress enacted all 12 full year 
     appropriations bills by December 27. If Congress fails to 
     once again enact full-year appropriations bills, or continues 
     running the government into 2022 under continuing 
     resolutions, it will send the wrong signal to the 
     government's partners, like those in our industry. We count 
     on stable, reliable and adequate funding to support the 
     critical capabilities that we provide for all Americans.
       Like other industries, COVID-19 took a serious toll on our 
     workforce and the thousands of small- and medium-sized 
     businesses along the supply chain that are at the heart of 
     the aerospace and defense industries. More than ever, 
     businesses across all industries need predictability and 
     consistency.
       We again ask that you ensure that all government programs 
     receive full Fiscal Year 2022 funding on or before December 
     3, 2021.
           Sincerely,

                                                 Eric Fanning,

                                      President and CEO, Aerospace
     Industries Association.
                                  ____

  



                                     Coalition on Human Needs,

                                                November 24, 2021.
       Dear Chairman Leahy: On behalf of the Coalition on Human 
     Needs, I am writing to strongly urge you to do everything in 
     your power to enact omnibus FY 2022 appropriations 
     legislation including all 12 subcommittee bills, and thank 
     you for your leadership towards this end. Our nation badly 
     needs the increased funding provided in the Senate and House 
     Appropriations Committee bills. We face many increased needs, 
     a great many exacerbated by the pandemic and its economic 
     dislocations. For more than a decade, funding levels for 
     vital human needs programs have shrunk, especially taking 
     inflation into account. If Congress fails to enact omnibus 
     appropriations legislation and instead defaults to a long-
     term continuing resolution (CR) with flat funding, we will 
     seriously damage our capacity to respond to the multiple 
     public health and economic crises we face.
       Members of the Coalition on Human Needs, including human 
     service provider organizations, faith groups, labor, civil 
     rights, policy experts and other advocates concerned with 
     meeting the needs of people with low incomes, 
     enthusiastically welcomed the funding levels provided in the 
     Biden FY 2022 budget and the House and Senate Appropriations 
     Committees. We have tracked nearly 200 human needs programs 
     over the past decade. Between FYs 2010 and 2020, we found 
     that two-thirds of these programs, covering health care, 
     housing, nutrition, social services, education, training, and 
     more, had lost ground, taking inflation into account. In the 
     past year, we have begun to rebuild. But the needs are also 
     growing.
       We now face rising prices affecting necessities including 
     utilities, food, and rent. Flat funding from a prolonged CR 
     would fail our people by not providing needed increases in 
     programs such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance 
     Program (LIHEAP). The Senate Labor-Health and Human Services-
     Education Subcommittee-introduced bill increases funding by 
     $175 million. This is too modest when taking into account 
     that natural gas heating costs are projected to rise by 30 
     percent this winter and heating oil is expected to rise by 43 
     percent; flat funding would be wholly inadequate. Nutrition 
     programs will also need funding increases because of rising 
     food prices. The Senate Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee 
     proposal includes $576 million for home-delivered meals for 
     seniors, an increase of $300 million above the FY 2021 
     enacted level. Responding to a serious increase in people 
     experiencing homelessness, the Senate Transportation-Housing 
     and Urban Development Subcommittee-introduced bill would 
     increase Homelessness Assistance programs to $3.26 billion, 
     $260 million more than FY 2021. These funds would expand 
     services for homeless youth and people fleeing from domestic 
     violence, and would provide additional permanent housing for 
     chronically unhoused people. While the Senate Subcommittee 
     bill would cover current rental voucher program costs, the 
     House bill would expand rental assistance to 125,000 
     additional households. These increases are vitally needed. 
     For the first 11 months of this year, median one-bedroom 
     apartment rents rose 12.1 percent; for

[[Page S8903]]

     two-bedroom units, the median increase was 13.2 percent. In 
     the previous two years, median rent increases were less than 
     1 percent. Flat funding for housing and homelessness programs 
     would be simply unacceptable.
       We have for some time faced a substance use crisis, and 
     have reached 100,000 deaths from opioid overdoses already 
     this year, up from about 93,000 in 2020. The Senate funding 
     level for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 
     Administration (SAMHSA) is $9.1 billion, $3.1 billion more 
     than funding in FY 2021. Without this substantial increase, 
     we will not be able to cope with the continuing rise in 
     opioid addiction.
       The pandemic has markedly increased mental health problems. 
     From August 2020 to February 2021, the CDC reported an 
     increase in adults with anxiety or depressive disorders, from 
     36.4 percent to 41.5 percent, and reports rose of unmet 
     mental health care needs. The proposed SAMHSA funding levels 
     allow us to respond more adequately. The Senate Labor-HHS-
     Education Subcommittee proposal would increase mental health 
     services overall to $2.97 billion, an increase of nearly $1.2 
     billion over FY 2021. In particular, the Senate Subcommittee 
     bill more than doubles funding for the Mental Health Block 
     Grant, to $1.58 billion for FY 2022. The House-passed funding 
     for Labor-HHS-Education makes a welcome increase in 
     Children's Mental Health funding, stopping the inflation-
     driven erosion that caused a 14 percent reduction from FY 
     2010 to FY 2020. We must not return to flat funding when the 
     pandemic has adversely affected the mental health of millions 
     of children and adults.
       Over the past decade, we allowed our public health capacity 
     to diminish, and as a consequence we were not ready to cope 
     with COVID-19. The Senate Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee 
     appropriations bill increases the Centers for Disease Control 
     about $1.85 billion over the current year, allowing for the 
     agency to rebuild so that it can more effectively respond to 
     COVID-19 and future health threats.
       We know our economy is hampered by a mismatch between jobs 
     available and people with the skills to fill those positions. 
     FY 2022 appropriations proposals include increases in 
     Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act programs (WIOA), 
     YouthBuild, Registered Apprenticeships, and Reintegration of 
     Ex-Offender programs, as well as a new National Youth 
     Employment Program. These will lead to jobs with higher pay 
     and broadly shared economic growth. These increases are 
     needed to overcome a ten-year 17 percent reduction in WIOA 
     programs and to move us forward.
       There are too many important programs to list here. But we 
     do wish to underscore that children have experienced many 
     hardships during the pandemic, including unprecedented losses 
     in education and alarming increases in reports of households 
     with children sometimes or often not having enough to eat. 
     The historic increases proposed in Title I K-12 education for 
     students with low incomes and in special education funding 
     are urgently needed to help children overcome the educational 
     setbacks they have experienced. Title I spending rises by at 
     least $16.6 billion over FY 2021, and there will be a $2.6 
     billion increase in IDEA state grants for more than 7.6 
     million students with disabilities.
       The FY 2022 appropriations bills drawn up in the House and/
     or Senate include many important funding increases to help 
     families care for their children. Funding for the Women, 
     Infants and Children (WIC) nutrition program must accommodate 
     an increase in benefits that was extended through the end of 
     December in the current Continuing Resolution, and must not 
     be allowed to expire at that time. In addition to the mental 
     health, housing, nutrition, and education funding already 
     mentioned here, there are badly needed increases in child 
     care, Head Start, early learning programs, and child abuse 
     prevention and treatment programs. There are also urgently 
     needed increases in funds to care for unaccompanied migrant 
     children: at $4.9 billion, a $3.6 billion increase over FY 
     2021 in the Senate Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee bill.
       The nation's recovery depends on strengthening a host of 
     domestic programs that have been allowed to shrink for years, 
     not just to get to where they had been before, but to respond 
     to needs far greater because of the pandemic and its global 
     economic dislocations. A long-term continuing resolution 
     would be a severe failure to address these needs. We strongly 
     urge you to enact omnibus appropriations legislation 
     including all twelve bills as soon as possible.
           Sincerely,
                                                Deborah Weinstein,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____

                                                November 10, 2021.
       Dear Majority Leader Schumer and Minority Leader McConnell: 
     On behalf of the millions of veterans our organizations 
     represent, we write to express serious concerns about reports 
     that the Senate is considering approving a full-year 
     continuing resolution to fund the federal government for the 
     remainder of fiscal year 2022, which would have significant 
     negative consequences for veterans, their families, 
     caregivers and survivors. Therefore, we are asking that you 
     work together to ensure that veterans programs, benefits and 
     medical services receive the full level of funding for fiscal 
     year 2022 that was approved with strong bipartisan support 
     (25 to 5) by the Senate Appropriations Committee in August.
       As you know, Congress approved and the President signed a 
     short-term continuing resolution (Public Law 117-43) on 
     September 30th to fund the federal government through 
     December 3, 2021, extending funding at the levels previously 
     enacted in fiscal year 2021 appropriations legislation. 
     Funding for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical care 
     and benefit payments for fiscal year 2022 was previously 
     approved in December 2020 as advance appropriations in 
     Division J (Military Construction and Veterans Affairs) of 
     the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Public Law 116-
     260. However, the advance appropriations process only works 
     properly if funding levels are adjusted to address increased 
     demand for benefits and services as part of the following 
     year's regular appropriations process, as is necessary for 
     fiscal year 2022. Further, if Congress passes a full-year 
     continuing resolution, all other programs, services and 
     benefits would remain funded at fiscal year 2021 levels, 
     which would fall short of the anticipated needs.
       For example, a full-year continuing resolution could result 
     in an estimated $7 billion shortfall in funding for mandatory 
     compensation and pension benefits, in large part due to an 
     increased number of benefit claims resulting from 
     congressional approval of new diseases related to Agent 
     Orange exposure for Vietnam veterans.
       In addition, the time it takes to process these and other 
     claims for benefits would be significantly increased without 
     the $300 million increase for the Veterans Benefits 
     Administration approved by the Senate Appropriations 
     Committee. Similarly, reductions from the Committee-approved 
     levels for the Board of Veterans' Appeals and the National 
     Cemetery Administration would negatively impact veterans and 
     their survivors seeking their services and benefits.
       Enacting a full-year continuing resolution would also 
     negatively hamper veterans' ability to receive timely medical 
     care absent the $3.3 billion increase for Veterans Medical 
     Community Care approved by the Senate Committee. VA's 
     critical Medical and Prosthetic Research programs would be 
     cut by $67 million and funding to support VA's health care 
     infrastructure would be cut $450 million below the levels 
     approved by the Committee if Congress passes a full-year 
     continuing resolution.
       As leaders of the Senate, we call on you to reject 
     consideration of a full-year continuing resolution that would 
     reduce veterans' funding below what has already been approved 
     in an overwhelming bipartisan vote of the Senate 
     Appropriations Committee. Instead, we ask that you use your 
     influence to ensure that the Senate completes consideration 
     of the fiscal year 2022 appropriations so that veterans, 
     their families, caregivers and survivors have timely access 
     to all the benefits, services and medical care they have 
     earned.
           Respectfully,
     Lawrence W. Montreuil,
       National Legislative Director, The American Legion.
     Joy J. Llem,
       National Legislative Director, DAV (Disabled American 
     Veterans).
     Tom Porter,
       Executive Vice President, Government Affairs, Iraq and 
     Afghanistan Veterans of America.
     Heather Ansley, Esq., MSW,
       Associate Executive Director of Government Relations, 
     Paralyzed Veterans of America.
     Patrick Murray,
       Director, National Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign 
     Wars.
     Dan Merry,
       Colonel, USAF (Ret), Vice President for Government 
     Relations, Military Officers Association of America.
     Sharon Hodge,
       Director for Policy and Government Affairs, Vietnam 
     Veterans of America.
     Brian Dempsey,
       Government Affairs Director, Wounded Warrior Project.

  Mr. LEAHY. I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ossoff). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


                 Unanimous Consent Agreement--H.R. 6119

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
resume legislative session and proceed to the immediate consideration 
of H.R. 6119, which was received from the House and is at the desk; 
that the only

[[Page S8904]]

amendment in order be Marshall-Lee No. 4868; that Senator Lee be 
recognized to speak for up to 10 minutes and that, following his 
remarks, the Senate vote on the Marshall amendment; that upon 
disposition of the Marshall amendment, the bill shall be considered 
read a third time and the Senate vote on passage of the bill, as 
amended, if amended, with 60 affirmative votes required for passage; 
that there be 6 minutes for debate equally divided in the usual form 
prior to each vote, all without further intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.