[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 23307-23308]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                   UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT--S. 82

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I congratulate all who have been involved in 
this next unanimous consent. A lot of effort has gone into it. I will 
not name them individually, but I know several Senators have been 
following very closely.
  I ask unanimous consent on Monday, October 14, it be in order for the 
majority leader to proceed to the consideration of S. 82, the FAA 
reauthorization bill, that the majority and minority managers of the 
bill be recognized to modify the committee amendments, and further that 
only aviation-related amendments be in order to the bill, that relevant 
second-degree amendments will be in order.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I do not intend to object. But I have been 
trying now for almost 2 years on this very important legislation to 
deal with a very serious problem my constituents have brought to my 
attention dealing with the loophole-ridden Death On The High Seas Act.
  We had families at home in Oregon lose loved ones in international 
waters as a result of a situation where a Korean freighter ran them 
over. I have been repeatedly assured in the Senate Commerce Committee 
that we would have an opportunity on the floor of the Senate to remedy 
this great injustice. In fact, Chairman McCain had agreed with me 
previously to work to reform the Death On The High Seas Act to ensure 
that victims of maritime accidents would have the same rights as those 
provided to victims of aviation accidents under the FAA bill.
  I have been extremely patient with respect to this matter. I have 
indicated on at least two occasions that I would not offer the 
amendment. I do not intend to do it now because the FAA legislation is 
of such extraordinary importance. But I want to make it clear to the 
Senate that at the next available opportunity, I am going to do 
everything I can to ensure that these victims of these maritime 
tragedies--tragedies in international waters where very often they are 
run over by foreign freighters and left at sea languishing for hours 
and hours--actually have a remedy. They do not today. It is a grave 
injustice.
  We have discussed this at considerable length in the Senate Commerce 
Committee. In fact, we even made changes in the Death on the High Seas 
Act in the past without addressing this particular issue.
  I do not intend to hold up the consideration of the FAA legislation 
because it is so important, but I want to make it very clear to the 
Senate that at the next available opportunity, we are going to debate 
this on the floor of the Senate. We are going to have an up-or-down 
vote on it. My colleagues are now aware of that.
  Mr. President, I withdraw my reservation.
  Several Senators addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. WARNER. Reserving the right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, may I address the distinguished majority 
leader who has been very helpful to the interests of my State given 
that National Airport and Dulles Airport are undergoing extensive 
modernization. In the present form of the bill that the leader has 
designated, is that issue taken care of? If not, is the opportunity 
open for the Senator from Virginia and others to address that issue?
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield under his 
reservation, first, I thank Senator Wyden for his comments and for the 
record he has made and for not objecting. I know this is an important 
issue to him. He could object and bring additional pressure on the 
chairman and the committee. He is on the committee. I know he will 
continue to work on it. I know he and Senator McCain will be talking 
about it on Monday. I thank him for not objecting.
  With regard to the question of the Senator from Virginia, I believe 
the issue that is so important to him is addressed in the bill the way 
he understands it to be. But if it is not or if there is any problem, 
under this unanimous consent request, relevant amendments on aviation 
would be in order and any amendment that he or the other Senator from 
Virginia wishes to offer with regard to this matter would be in order 
and would be protected.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished leader. Likewise, 
the issue of the number of slots has been a moving target. May I 
inquire as to the current specification in the bill and whether or not 
that could be changed by the proponents of the bill under this UC 
between now and the date it is brought up?
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, in answer to the Senator's question, I have 
in my mind the number of slots that are available based on the 
discussions he and I have had over about 2 years. I am assuming that is 
what is in the bill. I have to check and make sure of the exact number, 
but whatever it is, if the Senator is not satisfied with that, an 
amendment and a debate to change that number would certainly be in 
order.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank our leader for the assistance he 
has given throughout the years to the Commonwealth of Virginia and 
other interested parties with regard to these two airports.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WELLSTONE addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object and I 
shall not--I do not think I will--as I understand this unanimous 
consent agreement, this will be the FAA bill with relevant amendments. 
Does the majority leader intend to bring up the nuclear waste bill?
  Mr. LOTT. I would like to bring up the nuclear waste bill. I think 
this is a major environmental issue. It is very important to a number 
of States, I believe, including the Senator's State of Minnesota.
  There has been an indication there may be a desire for a filibuster 
and perhaps the Democrat leadership would not support cloture on this 
very important issue. If that is the case, then I would not be inclined 
to file cloture on it on Friday, giving us additional time to see if we 
can work out an agreement or accommodation as to how to bring up that 
very important issue.
  I do not know how many States have nuclear waste sitting in open 
cooling pools or how many people have looked at the need to address 
this problem. I believe a large number of Senators probably as many as 
two-thirds or more, believe we need to move this legislation. I want to 
find a way to do that.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. If I can do a quick followup, the reason I asked the 
majority leader was actually less because of the subject matter of that 
bill but the question whether or not he also plans on restricting it to 
relevant amendments. What I am asking is, when will I have an 
opportunity as a Senator from Minnesota to bring legislation to the 
floor of the Senate which will alleviate the economic pain and 
suffering of family farmers? That is what I want to know. Are we going 
to have an opportunity for debate on agriculture policy?
  Mr. LOTT. We certainly know the Senator from Minnesota has views on 
that or amendments he wants to offer. One of the things we are planning 
on doing, I say to the Senator--and Senator Daschle may want to talk 
about it--is to bring up the sanctions bill. I do not know whether or 
not the Senator's amendments will be in order to that. It does relate 
to food and agriculture. He may have something to say or some amendment 
he wants to offer on that.
  We have not agreed on a time. You may wind up objecting to it, but I

[[Page 23308]]

think it is high time we have some debate around here and some thought 
about how we deal with these unilateral sanctions of countries, how we 
use food and medicine in that area. We had a vote on it in Agriculture. 
It is still very controversial. I have indicated it is my intent and it 
is my hope, if we can find a way, to bring that bill to the floor.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. With an opportunity for other amendments dealing with 
agriculture.
  Mr. LOTT. I believe they probably could be offered to that bill. I do 
not particularly relish the idea, but I think they probably could be.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the majority leader.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democratic leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, will the majority leader yield? He made 
reference to a couple of matters which ought to be addressed briefly.
  First, with regard to nuclear waste, I know of nobody on this side of 
the aisle who wishes to filibuster the bill, and I will be happy to 
clarify that with the majority leader. I think there is an interest, 
however, in amending the bill. We would love to have the bill come to 
the Senate floor under normal Senate order, regular order, and if the 
bill were brought up under regular order, we would be in support of 
moving the bill and voting in favor of the motion to proceed. I will be 
happy to work with the majority leader to schedule that, if we could 
accommodate Senators who wish to offer amendments.
  With regard to the FAA debate, this was one of the more difficult 
agreements. I appreciate the ability of many of our colleagues to allow 
us the opportunity to have this debate on Monday. But I must say that, 
once again, this is a unanimous consent request to limit debate and 
limit amendments. We are agreeing to this only because we believe the 
FAA bill is a matter of great national security and of import not only 
for safety and health of aviation but because we believe we have 
already taken too long to reauthorize this legislation.
  So because of the expiration of the authorizing legislation, because 
of the safety and health matters, we share the view that this 
legislation ought to come up and be debated and that we ought to limit 
ourselves to relevant amendments.
  But again I say that we have not had a bill before the Senate under 
regular Senate order since last May. We have gone through June, July, 
August, and now September--4 months--and we are simply saying: Let's 
bring bills to the floor under regular order. Let's have a good debate, 
and let's have amendments offered. I am hopeful that we can work 
through the rest of the agenda with that in mind.
  So we are not going to object to this bill being brought up, again, 
under abnormal Senate order and rule. But I think there is a growing 
concern that too many bills are coming to the floor without the 
opportunity for a full debate.
  So whether it is nuclear waste or whether it is an array of other 
bills that could come to the floor, we are ready to debate them. We are 
ready to have a good amount of time dedicated to whatever piece of 
legislation ought to be considered. But we want the right to offer 
amendments. We will forego that right under FAA, but there are not many 
bills that fit into that category, if any, for the rest of the year.
  I thank the majority leader for yielding.
  Mr. SCHUMER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Reserving the right to object, and I will not object, I 
want to take this moment to thank both the majority leader and the 
minority leader, the Senator from Arizona, and the Senator from South 
Carolina, for their patience because we did have a problem that 
affected my area that has been worked out.
  I ask the majority leader one little question. I want to confirm that 
the language we have talked about seems to meet the agreement of all 
sides. I want to get the attention of the majority leader. I was 
thanking him and the minority leader and others, and I just want to 
clarify the language we have talked about seems to meet the agreement 
of all the major players in solving that problem.
  Mr. LOTT. I have not had an opportunity to talk personally, directly, 
to the Senator from Arizona, but I am informed by his senior aide that 
he is committed to living with the language that the Senator from New 
York is familiar with, and that also the Senator from South Carolina, 
the ranking Democrat, has indicated he will comply with that. And based 
on the assurance I received, then I would work to make sure that 
understanding was lived up to. Whether you agree with the final result 
or not, I will make sure that what your understanding is on the part I 
have been involved in would be honored.
  Mr. SCHUMER. I thank the Senator and thank again the Members of the 
body for their indulgence on this issue.
  Mr. BRYAN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. BRYAN. Earlier, the majority leader made inquiry about the 
position on the nuclear waste bill. I want to put the majority leader 
on notice the Senators from Nevada are not prepared to surrender any of 
the procedural rights on this issue. This, as you know, is an issue----
  Mr. LOTT. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. BRYAN. I am happy to.
  Mr. LOTT. You mean you are not ready to go to final passage on this 
bill at this point?
  Mr. BRYAN. The Senator from Mississippi, with his characteristic 
insight, has hit the nail right on the head.
  Mr. LOTT. Let me assure the Chair and my colleagues that we know the 
very passionate feelings of the Senator from Nevada. We know he is 
going to make them heard, and in every way he can. And he will be 
entitled to all the rules of the Senate in that effort. We understand 
that and appreciate it.
  Mr. BRYAN. I thank the majority leader.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.

                          ____________________