[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 15842-15843]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                              HOCUS POCUS

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I would like to note that there are some 
things happening around here of late that make me wonder if we are in 
an episode of the X-Files. I am troubled with the mysterious appearance 
and disappearance of funds within the conference report for Military 
Construction. In the effort to develop an emergency spending package, 
the House included money for meth lab clean-up. It voted on money. The 
Senate-passed bill had money for meth lab clean-up. Both Houses of 
Congress recognized that there was a real emergency. Both bodies 
recognized the need to provide emergency money to DEA to help pay for 
the costs of cleaning up the toxic waste dumps caused by illegal meth 
production.
  I and other members of this body have been concerned for some time 
about this problem. We have written the President, the head of the 
Office of Management and Budget, the Attorney General, and the Majority 
Leader and members of the Committee on Appropriations. The Majority 
Whip of the Senate had an emergency meth spending item accepted as part 
of the bill passed by the Senate. But it seems we've had a case of 
alien abduction. All--all the meth money disappeared in conference and 
no one seems to know how or why. The House included money. The Senate 
included money. The conference to reconcile the differences, however, 
included no money. What this means is strange math in which one plus 
one equals zero.
  Mr. President, I have participated in various conferences with the 
other body, and I know they can be complicated affairs. Strong 
disagreements can exist over how to phrase a section, or how much 
funding this particular project should receive. But there have always 
been some guidelines governing a conference. First, you are working 
toward a compromise. This means, by definition, you are not going to 
get everything you want. However, it also means you will get something 
that will work. Second, in a conference, you aren't starting from 
scratch. Each body has reviewed, debated, and passed a version of 
legislation--a starting point, if you will, for compromise.
  These compromises, often difficult to arrive at, are worked out 
behind closed doors. Out of the watchful eye of the public. Legislating 
can be an ugly process, and often negotiations continue in a much more 
open and frank manner in private than under the media microscope. But 
compromise should not be the occasion for legislating afresh, for 
ignoring the expressed intent of majorities in both Houses.
  Looking through the Military Construction Appropriations bill this 
last week, I was distressed at some of the items I found that seem to 
have magically appeared. 6 C-130Js and a new Gulf Stream 5 for the 
Coast Guard, for example. So far as I know, the Coast Guard did not ask 
for a Gulf Stream, and we did not vote for one. But there it is.
  At the same time, it seems that needed funds to support the DEA's 
continued assistance to State and local law enforcement agencies to 
clean up methamphetamine labs have disappeared--and no one seems to 
know where it went.
  Heading into the conference, it was clear what the situation was. The

[[Page 15843]]

House had provided $15 million in emergency funds for needed 
methamphetamine lab-cleanup. The Senate provided a total of $50 million 
for meth-related activities by the DEA--$10 million was added in 
Committee, and an additional $40 million was adopted on the floor for 
``initiatives to combat methamphetamine production and trafficking.'' 
So you would think--I certainly thought--that the conferees would 
return with some funding--most likely between $15 and $50 million--for 
meth lab clean-up.
  But something happened in the conference. Someone waved a magic wand, 
and ``Poof!'' The money is gone. Where did it go? The conferees don't 
know. Why is it gone? The sponsors of the funds don't know. I don't 
know. Inquiries have left me feeling like Jimmy Stewart commenting on 
the evidence in his case in the 1959 movie classic, ``Anatomy of a 
Murder,'' where he notes evidence appears and disappears in a ghostly 
fashion. But what I do know is that I have to explain this to my 
constituents--to the law enforcement agencies in Iowa who are dependent 
upon these funds to support their clean up efforts of these mini 
environmental catastrophes. I am not alone.
  All of this funding hocus pocus I find to be very troubling. I hope 
we can solve the mystery and avoid its like in the future.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The distinguished Senator from Montana is 
recognized.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I ask to speak as if in morning business, 
and I believe my time is taken from the time controlled by Senator 
Durbin.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.

                          ____________________