[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 21]
[Senate]
[Pages 30595-30599]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, 2000

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent the Senate 
resume the consideration of H.J. Res. 82 and there be 5 minutes of 
debate on each of the two amendments in order to the resolution.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Therefore, at least one further vote will occur yet 
tonight. In addition, the Senate will convene tomorrow at 10 a.m., and 
hopefully process some legislative items that have been cleared and 
that would be considered by the House.
  The Senate could also consider the Work Incentives conference report. 
Therefore votes can be expected to occur during the session of the 
Senate on Friday. We will stay in close touch with both sides of the 
aisle to see when the best time might be for that. We will try to 
accommodate as many Senators as possible and stack them if we need to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the joint resolution.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A joint resolution (H.J. Res. 82) making further continuing 
     appropriations for the fiscal year 2000 and for other 
     purposes.

  The Senate proceeded to consider the resolution.
  Mr. BYRD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will please come to order.


                           Amendment No. 2780

  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from West Virginia [Mr. Byrd], for himself, Mr. 
     McConnell, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Reid, Mr. Craig, 
     Mr. Bryan, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Murkowski, Mr. Crapo, 
     Mr. Enzi, Mr. Burns, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Shelby, Mr. 
     Gramm, and Mr. Grams, proposes an amendment numbered 2780.

  Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be 
waived.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. DISPOSAL OF EXCESS SPOIL AND COAL MINE WASTE.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law 
     (including any regulation or court ruling), hereafter--
       (1) in rendering permit decisions for discharges of excess 
     spoil and coal mine waste into waters of the United States 
     from surface coal mining and reclamation operations, the 
     permitting authority shall apply section 404 of the Federal 
     Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and the section 
     404(b)(1) guidelines pursuant to section 404(b)(1) of the

[[Page 30596]]

     Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1344(b)(1)) 
     and implementing regulations set forth in part 230 of title 
     40, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on October 19, 
     1999);
       (2) the permitted disposal of such spoil or waste meeting 
     the requirements of the section 404(b)(1) guidelines referred 
     to in paragraph (1) shall be deemed to satisfy the criteria 
     for granting a variance under regulations set forth in 
     sections 816.57 and 817.57 of title 30, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, and applicable State regulations; and
       (3) Federal and State water quality standards shall not 
     apply to the portions of waters filled by discharges 
     permitted pursuant to the procedures set forth in paragraphs 
     (1) and (2); all applicable Federal and State water quality 
     standards shall apply to all portions of waters other than 
     those filled pursuant to the permitting procedures set forth 
     in paragraphs (1) and (2).
       (b) Duration of Effectiveness.--The permitting procedures 
     specified in subsection (a) shall remain in effect until the 
     later of--
       (1) the date that is 2 years after the date of enactment of 
     this Act; or
       (2) the effective date of regulations promulgated to 
     implement recommendations made as a result of the 
     environmental impact statement relating to the permitting 
     process, the preparation of which was announced at 64 Fed. 
     Reg. 5800 (February 5, 1999).
       (c) Effect of Section.--Nothing in this section modifies, 
     supersedes, undermines, displaces, or amends any requirement 
     of, or regulation issued under, the Federal Water Pollution 
     Control Act (commonly known as the ``Clean Water Act'') (33 
     U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or the Surface Mining Control and 
     Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 et seq.), as applied 
     by the responsible Federal agencies on October 19, 1999.
       (d) Period of Effectiveness.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law repealing or terminating the effectiveness 
     of this Act, this section shall remain in effect until the 
     date of termination of the effectiveness of the permitting 
     procedures in accordance with subsection (b).

     SEC. __. HARDROCK MINING.

       (a) In General.--For the purposes of section 1000(a)(3) of 
     division B of the Act enacting H.R. 3194 of the 106th 
     Congress, in lieu of section 357 of title III of H.R. 3423 of 
     the 106th Congress, as introduced on November 17, 1999, 
     regarding the issuance of regulations on hardrock mining, the 
     following shall apply:
       (1) Hardrock mining.--None of the funds made available 
     under this Act or any other Act shall be used by the 
     Secretary of the Interior to promulgate final regulations to 
     revise subpart 3809 of 43, Code of Federal Regulations, 
     except that the Secretary, after the end of the public 
     comment period required by section 3002 of the 1999 Emergency 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-31; 113 Stat. 
     89), may issue final regulations to amend that subpart if the 
     regulations are consistent with--
       (A) the regulatory gap findings identified in the report of 
     the National Research Council entitled ``Hardrock Mining on 
     Federal Lands''; and
       (B) statutory authorities in effect as of the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (2) Limitation.--Nothing in this section expands the 
     statutory authority of the Secretary of the Interior in 
     effect as of the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) Period of Effectiveness.--This section--
       (1) takes effect 1 day after the date of enactment of the 
     Act enacting H.R. 3194 referred to in subsection (a); and
       (2) notwithstanding any other provision of law repealing or 
     terminating the effectiveness of this Act, shall remain in 
     effect unless repealed by Act of Congress that makes specific 
     reference to this section.

     SEC. __. MILLSITES.

       (a) In General.--For the purposes of section 1000(a)(3) of 
     division B of the Act enacting H.R. 3194 of the 106th 
     Congress, in lieu of section 337 of title III of H.R. 3423 of 
     the 106th Congress, as introduced on November 17, 1999, 
     regarding the millsites opinion, the following shall apply:
       (1) Millsites opinion.--No funds shall be expended by the 
     Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture, 
     for fiscal years 2000 and 2001, to limit the number or 
     acreage of millsites based on the ratio between the number or 
     acreage of millsites and the number or acreage of associated 
     lode or placer claims with respect to--
       (A) any patent application excluded from the operation of 
     section 112 of the Department of the Interior and Related 
     Agencies Appropriations Act, 1995, by section 113 of that Act 
     (108 Stat. 2519);
       (B) any operation or property for which a plan of 
     operations has been approved before the date of enactment of 
     this Act; or
       (C) any operation or property for which a plan of 
     operations, or amendment or modification to an existing plan, 
     was submitted to the Bureau of Land Management or the Forest 
     Service before May 21, 1999.
       (2) No ratification.--Nothing in this Act or the 1999 
     Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-31) 
     shall be construed as an explicit or tacit adoption, 
     ratification, endorsement, approval, rejection, or 
     disapproval of the opinion dated November 7, 1997, by the 
     Solicitor of the Department of the Interior concerning 
     millsites.
       (b) Period of Effectiveness.--This section--
       (1) takes effect 1 day after the date of enactment of the 
     Act enacting H.R. 3194 referred to in subsection (a); and
       (2) notwithstanding any other provision of law repealing or 
     terminating the effectiveness of this Act, shall remain in 
     effect unless repealed by Act of Congress that makes specific 
     reference to this section.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous agreement, there is 5 
minutes equally divided for debate at this time.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, can we have order in the Chamber, 
please?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct. Will the Senate please 
come to order?
  The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I had earlier planned to speak at least 2 weeks on 
this amendment. We are getting a bargain. I am only going to speak 3 
minutes, not 2 weeks. Let me just say this: I made my speech earlier 
today. I will not make it again now. I urge my friends to vote for this 
amendment. When God drove Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden, he 
pronounced an edict: ``In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread.''
  The coal miners of West Virginia and Kentucky and other States of 
this country earn their bread in the sweat of their brow. But not only 
the coal miners have been affected by this court's jurisdiction, by its 
ruling; the truckers, the railway workers, the men and women who 
operate the barges that go up and down the rivers, the suppliers--these 
people, their families are affected by this judge's order.
  This amendment does not seek to undercut, undermine, alter, modify, 
amend, or repeal the Clean Water Act or the Surface Mining Control and 
Reclamation Act. I say that on my honor. The other cosponsors and I do 
not seek to do that. We only seek to put the situation back to where it 
was prior to the U.S. District judge's order, the status quo ante, 
which at that time made West Virginia the most strictly controlled 
State in the Union environmentally as far as mountaintop mining was 
concerned, mountaintop mining--the strictest in the Union.
  We want to go back to that, and the regulations that controlled then 
were agreed upon and devised by the administration's own regulatory 
agencies--the Army Corps of Engineers, the EPA, the Interior Department 
through its Office of Surface Mining.
  This amendment states, so there can be no doubt about it:

       Nothing in this section modifies, supersedes, undermines, 
     displaces, or amends any requirement of, or regulation issued 
     under, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly 
     known as the ``Clean Water Act'') . . . or the Surface Mining 
     Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 . . . as applied by the 
     responsible Federal agencies--

  Which are the agencies of this administration--

     on October 19, 1999.

  So there it is. The amendment has been misrepresented. There has been 
much misinformation about this amendment.
  Mr. President, I close by thanking those who have cosponsored this 
amendment with me. Their names are on the amendment.
  How much time have I used?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 2\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. BYRD. I yield myself another minute and a half.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time was 5 minutes equally divided, which 
is 2\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent that I may speak another minute and 
a half.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. I thank the Chair.
  The amendment is proposed by Mr. Byrd, for himself, Mr. McConnell, 
Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Reid, Mr. Craig, Mr. Bryan, Mr. 
Hatch, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Murkowski, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Burns, and 
Mr. Kyl--I thank all those Senators who supported this amendment and 
others who will vote for it. Particularly I want to

[[Page 30597]]

recognize the efforts of my chief cosponsor, the distinguished senior 
Senator from Kentucky, whose early and strong support was given to this 
amendment, for which I am extremely grateful. I thank both leaders for 
making this vote possible. I could speak longer, but I have said enough 
already.
  I urge all Senators to vote for this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from West 
Virginia. I appreciate his leadership not only on behalf of the coal 
miners of Kentucky but miners all across America.
  The President of the United States came to Hazard, KY, this summer. 
He bit his lip; he felt our pain. He said he wanted to help us. We 
said: We need jobs. And when the opportunity came to support the Byrd 
amendment which would at least keep the jobs we have now, the President 
would not support him.
  This administration is trying to destroy the mining industry in 
America, make no mistake about it. That is what this amendment is 
about.
  I thank the Senator from West Virginia for his leadership, and we 
hope very much our colleagues will be able to support us.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from 
Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I thank the Chair.
  Mr. President, I hope other Senators will want to speak in 
opposition. I think there should be opposition to this amendment. I 
have tremendous respect for my colleagues who have offered this 
amendment. I will say a couple things especially in response to the 
Senator from Kentucky.
  I am a Senator who cares a great deal about workers and about mine 
workers. I am a Senator who appreciates the sentiment behind this 
amendment. But the question is, What happens when the strip mining 
takes place, and what are the consequences for the people who live in 
these communities?
  I can speak certainly from what I have seen in eastern Kentucky, and 
it is pretty awful when that leftover rock and earth gets dumped into 
the streams. Many of the people have the wealth taken away from them, 
but they still have the land, they still have the streams, they still 
have the water, and now we see that kind of devastation.
  My concern is this amendment will create a loophole to the Clean 
Water Act. I know my colleague from West Virginia believes otherwise, 
but it is a very real concern. I point out to colleagues that it is my 
understanding the Federal district judge put a stay on his own decision 
while it was being appealed to the court of appeals. So it is not 
operative right now.
  I do not know why we are taking this action tonight. It is a big 
mistake from an environmental point of view, and I do not accept, I say 
to my colleague from Kentucky, the tradeoff that he presents as to 
workers versus some protection for the environment and some concern 
about the strip mining.
  I did not want to be the person to speak in opposition, but I do 
believe there is another perspective. I will vote no.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 3 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I know what is in this amendment. I prepared 
this amendment. I have been explaining it now for weeks. And, upon my 
honor, there is nothing in it that undermines or undercuts the Clean 
Water Act or the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, both of 
which I supported, one of which I called up as majority leader in this 
Senate in 1977.
  I know what I am talking about. I have lived under a coal miner's 
roof, ate from a coal miner's table, slept in a coal miner's bed. I 
have known the joys and the sorrows of coal miners. I married a coal 
miner's daughter. I know what I am talking about. I haven't just made a 
trip into West Virginia and come back to Washington to issue a news 
report on the State and its people. I have lived there for many years.
  I will be 82 years old the day after tomorrow. I know what those 
miners need. I am not misleading anybody. Let me say this to the 
Senator: That stay he refers to that the judge put on has no legal 
basis. The judge stated that it has no legal basis. He put it on, and 
he can lift it the day this Congress winds up its work.
  I hope Senators will vote for this amendment. There were 125,000 coal 
miners when I went to the House of Representatives; 125,000 in West 
Virginia. Today there are 20,000 or less. My dad was a coal miner. My 
wife's sister's husband died with black lung. My wife's sister's 
husband's father died under a slate fall. I know the joys and the 
sorrows of the mining people. I have helped to carry those miners, the 
heavy coffins, on the steep hillsides of West Virginia. I have not just 
gone into those hills poking around, and then coming back, and issuing 
news reports about their poverty. I know what they need, because I am 
one of them.
  Those 20,000 coal miners earn their bread in the sweat of their brow. 
Let's give them a vote. If the Senator from Minnesota had people who 
were faced with the loss of their jobs, this Senator would vote with 
the Senator from Minnesota and not say a word about it. I resent 
anything such as has been said by the Senator about my State and its 
people.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I have 1 
minute to respond.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The 
Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I appreciate the words of my colleague. 
It is an honest difference of interpretation of the amendment.
  The only thing I want to respond to, I do not want to be personal, 
but I would like to say to my colleague, I do not pretend to know West 
Virginia like you know West Virginia and Senator Rockefeller does; that 
is not the position I am taking, but as to the bopping in and bopping 
out, I will say that I want my colleague to know I have spent quite a 
bit of time in eastern Kentucky. That is where my wife's family is 
from. Her grandparents were all coal miners. I have spent time in east 
Tennessee as well. I spent a lot of time with people. I have seen what 
the strip mining has done to those communities. I am just expressing my 
honest viewpoint. That is all I am trying to do, I say to the Senator.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. ROBB. Mr. President, I join many others in this body in 
expressing my support for miners and for mining communities. In 
Virginia's Southwest region, mining creates the jobs that provide 
enough income to lift the next generation, that put the sons and 
daughters of miners through college, and that gives the region options 
other than coal.
  Virginia miners have expressed deep concerns that the broad 
application of Judge Haden's ruling would result in the devastation of 
the mining industry in the Southern Appalachian coal fields. The 
Judge's decision is not limited to the mountain top mining that was the 
subject of the original suit. It would apply to the use of valley fills 
from other forms of mining, including underground mining. The practical 
effect of this ruling is a virtual moratorium on mining in mountainous 
regions. We need to protect the environment and we also need to protect 
the livilihood of those hardworking families. I had hoped we could 
reach a compromise on this issue that would effectively allow us to do 
both.
  I have reviewed the Memorandum of Understanding between the federal 
and state agencies that could be used to mitigate the consequences of 
valley fills if they were allowed to continue. It was signed by the 
EPA, Department of the Interior, Army Corps of Engineers, and the State 
of West Virginia. All the signatories are sworn to protect the nation's 
water. I am convinced that if the MOU stood, the agencies involved 
would work diligently to mitigate any negative consequences from mining 
in the West Virginia coal fields. Nevertheless, it is imperative that 
we continue to be vigilant on the effects of mining

[[Page 30598]]

on the environment, and work to minimize its effects.
  I have also reviewed Judge Haden's ruling and see in that ruling the 
underlying conflict between what the regulations intend to do, and the 
actual costs of applying those regulations. It demonstrates once again 
how essential acting on regulatory reform is going to be in this 
Congress. It is imperative that we set in place a method of analyzing 
the true cost of the regulations, before they are put into place. I am 
certain the agencies involved want to do the right thing, by both 
miners and the environment. The rules as I read them make that 
virtually impossible. I am hopeful that this conflict can be resolved 
as quickly as possible. In the meantime, I intend to support the miners 
of Southwest Virginia.
  I must however, voice my strong opposition to the language on hard 
rock mining that has been added at the last minute to this amendment. 
My vote on this amendment stems only from my concern for the immediate 
effect Judge Haden's ruling would have on the economy of Southwest 
Virginia. I have opposed and will continue to oppose efforts to delay 
the review and revision of the nation's hard rock mining standards. My 
vote in no way supports the inclusion of hard rock provisions in this 
package.
  I ask unanimous consent that this statement be placed in the Record 
before the vote on Amendment No. 2780.
  Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support the Byrd 
amendment.
  We are scrambling around right here in the U.S. Senate to pass a 
stopgap spending bill to keep from shutting down a major portion of the 
Federal Government.
  So, it is very fitting that we add an amendment to that stopgap 
spending bill that would help us keep a Federal judge from shutting 
down the coal mining industry in West Virginia and possibly other 
States like Kentucky as well.
  This is a matter of survival for many of our coal mines. It is 
essential that we act now to prevent unnecessary damage to the 
industry--to prevent unnecessary unemployment--and to prevent 
unnecessary economic devastation in areas which have already been 
bypassed by the economic boom times that have blessed much of the 
Nation.
  A Federal district court judge in West Virginia ruled on October 21 
that a well-balanced working agreement between the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, the U.S. Department of the Interior, the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers and the West Virginia Division of Environmental 
Protection violated the Clean Water Act.
  That arbitrary ruling which basically overrules three Federal 
agencies' interpretation of the law is going to jeopardize the coal 
industry immediately in West Virginia and potentially in other States 
like my own State of Kentucky as well.
  We need to pass the Byrd Amendment to stay this ruling until we have 
had time to get the results of a pending environmental impact 
statement.
  It is a matter of simple fairness. The jobs and lives of many of our 
constituents are at stake.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Byrd amendment.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I voted in support of the Byrd amendment to 
provide for a 2-year moratorium during which mountain top mining 
activities may continue under a memorandum of agreement with the 
Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Interior and the 
Army Corps of Engineers. The EPA which is in charge of implementation 
of the Clean Water Act was a party to the agreement which would 
continue to force during the 2-year moratorium. An environmental impact 
study will go forward during the moratorium and regulations pursuant to 
the environmental impact statement can be promulgated. My vote on this 
amendment does not commit me to support the continuation of any such 
moratorium beyond this 2-year period during which the courts and the 
regulatory agencies will more fully evaluate the impacts on both the 
environment and the affected coal miners and their communities. The 
fact that the court has stayed the effect of its own opinion is further 
evidence that this legislative moratorium is both warranted and will do 
no damage to the underlying act.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, has all time expired?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to 
offer an amendment at this time on behalf of Senators Helms and Edwards 
of North Carolina with regard to funds for their disaster. And I ask 
unanimous consent that that vote occur in a stacked sequence, after it 
is debated, after the vote on the amendment by Senator Byrd and Senator 
McConnell, and that the first vote be just 10 minutes, and then the 
second vote would be 10 minutes also.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 2781

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I send to the desk then the amendment on 
behalf of Senators Helms and Edwards.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Lott], for Mr. Helms and 
     Mr. Edwards, proposes an amendment numbered 2781.

  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place insert:


  commodity credit corporation producer-owned marketing associations 
                              forgiveness

       Sec. 1. The Secretary of Agriculture shall reduce the 
     amount of any principal due on a loan made to marketing 
     association incorporated in the State of North Carolina for 
     the 1999 crop of an agricultural commodity by at least 75 
     percent if the marketing association suffered losses of the 
     agricultural commodity in a county with respect to which--(1) 
     a natural disaster was declared by the Secretary for losses 
     due to Hurricane Dennis, Floyd, or Irene; or (2) a major 
     disaster or emergency was declared by the President for 
     losses due to Hurricane Dennis, Floyd, or Irene under the 
     Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).
       If the Secretary assigns a grade quality for the 1999 crop 
     of an agricultural commodity marketed by an association 
     described in subsection (a) that is below the base quality of 
     the agricultural commodity, the Secretary shall compensate 
     the association for losses incurred by the association as a 
     result of the reduction in grade quality.
       Up to $81,000,000 of the resources of the Commodity Credit 
     Corporation may be used for the cost of this provision: 
     Provided, That the entire amount is designated by the 
     Congress as an emergency requirement pursuant to section 
     251(b)(2)(A) and Section 252(e) of the Balanced Budget and 
     Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, as amended.
       Sec. 2. In administering $50,000,000 in emergency 
     supplemental funding for the Emergency Conservation Program, 
     the Secretary shall give priority to the repair of structures 
     essential to the operation of the farm.

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I am honored they would allow me to do this 
on their behalf because I believe they were not treated properly in the 
wee hours of the morning with regard to an amount of money for disaster 
assistance for North Carolina. We are determined to assist them in 
getting that. We hope this will be accepted by the House in this form. 
But if not in this form, we will be back to carry out our commitment to 
the people in North Carolina and as a symbol to people all across 
America that, when it comes to disasters, there are no party lines and 
there is no division between the Capitol; we will do what is necessary 
to help people when they are desperate and need help.
  So I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on my amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the second 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2780

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2780. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.

[[Page 30599]]


  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Missouri (Mr. 
Ashcroft), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond), the Senator from 
Kentucky (Mr. Bunning), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Frist), the 
Senator from Washington (Mr. Gorton), the Senator from Texas (Mrs. 
Hutchison), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain), and the Senator from 
Oregon (Mr. Smith), are necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer), 
the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg), and the Senator from New 
York (Mr. Moynihan), are necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 56, nays 33, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 370 Leg.]

                                YEAS--56

     Abraham
     Allard
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Levin
     Lott
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--33

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Brownback
     Chafee, L.
     Collins
     Daschle
     Durbin
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Graham
     Harkin
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lugar
     Murray
     Reed
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Snowe
     Torricelli
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Ashcroft
     Bond
     Boxer
     Bunning
     Frist
     Gorton
     Hutchison
     Lautenberg
     McCain
     Moynihan
     Smith (OR)
  The amendment (No. 2780) was agreed to.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. CRAIG. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2781. The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Missouri: (Mr. 
Ashcroft), the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond), the Senator from 
Kentucky (Mr. Bunning), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Frist), the 
Senator from Washington (Mr. Gorton), the Senator from Texas (Mrs. 
Hutchison), the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain), and the Senator from 
Oregon (Mr. Smith) are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Kentucky (Mr. Bunning) would vote ``yea.''
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer), 
the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg), and the Senator from New 
York (Mr. Moynihan) are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 88, nays 1, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 371 Leg.]

                                YEAS--88

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Inhofe
     Inouye
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--1

       
     Voinovich
       

                             NOT VOTING--11

     Ashcroft
     Bond
     Boxer
     Bunning
     Frist
     Gorton
     Hutchison
     Lautenberg
     McCain
     Moynihan
     Smith (OR)
  The amendment (No. 2781) was agreed to.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. I move to reconsider the vote and I move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the joint resolution 
having been read the third time and passed, the motion to reconsider is 
laid upon the table.
  The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 82), as amended, was passed.

                          ____________________