[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 12]
[Senate]
[Pages 16763-16765]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                            2003--Continued


                             cloture motion

  Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I call for regular order with respect 
to the amendment numbered 4480, and I send a cloture motion to the 
desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The cloture motion having been presented

[[Page 16764]]

under rule XXII, the Chair directs the clerk to read the motion.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

                             Cloture Motion

       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the 
     provisions of Rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate, 
     hereby move to bring to a close the debate on Senator Byrd's 
     amendment No. 4480.
         Joseph Lieberman, Harry Reid, Jean Carnahan, Daniel K. 
           Inouye, Christopher Dodd, Herb Kohl, Jack Reed, Richard 
           J. Durbin, Kent Conrad, Paul Wellstone, Patrick Leahy, 
           Jeff Bingaman, Barbara Boxer, Byron L. Dorgan, Mark 
           Dayton, Debbie Stabenow, Jim Jeffords, Robert 
           Torricelli.

  Mr. DASCHLE. Madam President, I am happy to yield to the Senator from 
Idaho.
  Mr. CRAIG. I thank the majority leader for yielding. He has just 
filed cloture on the Byrd amendment. The underlying second degree is 
the Craig-Domenici amendment to try to deal with forest health. I 
appreciate the frustration of time here and the reality we have to get 
a lot of work done in the next several weeks to conclude the 
appropriations process.
  It was never our intent to block the Byrd amendment. This is a 
critical and necessary amendment that deals with fire itself and 
replacing some of the moneys or refurbishing, replenishing some of the 
moneys that have been spent fighting fires, primarily in the West but 
across the country, in our public forests.
  We are continuing to work. We had another meeting this morning. I 
told all of my colleagues, Democrat and Republican alike, that Monday 
was drop dead. I meant that only in the sense of the legislation 
itself. Clearly, we have worked hard. There have been some good faith 
efforts. There has also been a reality as to where all of the sides are 
on this issue. Tragically enough, no matter what we accomplish, the 
forests of our country are going to continue to burn at a high rate 
because of their diminished health because of public policy over the 
last good number of decades.
  But on Monday, in visiting with Senator Reid, I hope we will have 
something we can vote on--or a clear decision that we cannot arrive at 
an agreement. I hope at some point, Leader, I can come to you and ask 
you if you could vitiate the vote on cloture, that we could expedite 
this ourselves. But there are a good number on my side, and some on 
yours, who want more debate and at least more discussion on this issue, 
even if we can have opposing positions on which to vote.
  I do believe for the American people, who have seen the western skies 
full of smoke now since the middle of June, it is important that this 
Senate express its will on this issue.
  The Senator from South Dakota found an expression that fit his State. 
I do not criticize him for it because the Black Hills of South Dakota 
are in a state of forest health problems, as are other public forests. 
Clearly, it is important that we not walk away from this session of 
Congress without the public knowing where we are on this issue because, 
as the Senator knows, no matter what we do, even if we can have some 
aggressive effort on thinning and cleaning, the country must become 
ready to accept, tragically enough, that we are going to lose 5 million 
or 6 million acres a year of old growth and watershed and wildlife 
habitat to wildfires because of the public policy that has brought our 
forests to this current health environment.
  But I hope we can make a step, probably not a big one but at least a 
small step, in the right direction of showing the public we can manage 
their land and we can do so in an environmentally sensitive way that 
will replenish the health of these magnificent forests that have now 
grown to a state of disrepair.
  I understand where the leader is. I did want that expression out 
there. I hope we can come to the majority leader on Monday and say we 
have something, we hope you can vitiate, and we hope we can come to 
this floor and debate this issue and get on with the process.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Let me respond to the Senator from Idaho. I would be 
more than happy to entertain a consent agreement to vitiate the cloture 
vote on Tuesday if we arrive at a consensus about this over the 
weekend. We laid this bill down on September 4. It is now September 13, 
and I am told we have not spent this much time on any appropriations 
bill to date. So I attempted to be as patient as I could be with regard 
to the ongoing discussions. We have offered procedural arrangements to 
deal with this. They have not been acceptable to some. We have offered 
as many different iterations of compromise as I think our imaginations 
allow. But if there is a productive and successful effort over the 
weekend, we will certainly revisit the question.
  However, we have to move on, this is not only a fire amendment but it 
is a drought amendment, now, as a result of the overwhelming action 
taken by the Senate just last week. This is a very important piece of 
legislation, and we have to move along. There is too much work to be 
done in too short a time.
  So we will look at where we are on Monday and come to some 
conclusion. But if we are unsuccessful, we will have to move on with 
the cloture vote on Tuesday.
  I yield the floor and I thank my colleague.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Madam President, before the majority leader leaves the 
floor, I would like to comment on the discussion that just took place 
between the majority leader and Senator Craig and indicate to him I 
have been a daily participant in those negotiations. I have tried to 
act in good faith; many have. But somehow or another, we make one step 
forward, and literally the next time we meet, it looks as if we have 
gone one and a half back. It is getting more difficult.
  We don't intend to delay this bill once we know the good faith 
efforts of the Senators--which is about 10 of them--cannot reach an 
agreement. We will come forward. But we will have to take a little 
time, as best we can, without delaying things too much, to let 
everybody know what has happened. It will not take too long for that to 
occur. There are other Senators who may feel differently. The amendment 
is a Craig-Domenici amendment. We put it together, gathered the 
Senators, but I wanted the record to reveal we are not interested in 
delaying the good faith effort on this bill, but we have a powerful 
issue, as you well known, that burns at many of our hearts. I am sorry 
I had to use that terrible word. We are having burns elsewhere in our 
States.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
  Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, I had wanted to make some comments this 
morning on the issue of homeland security. I understand we are 
currently back on the Interior appropriations bill; is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. DORGAN. I ask the chairman of the Appropriations Committee if he 
has other business to transact on that appropriation. If not, I would 
like to offer some comments on homeland security, which is the second 
track we have been working on this week.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. BYRD. Madam President, if I may respond to the Senator's question 
without his losing his right to the floor? He has asked me a question.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BYRD. I assume the Senate will return to homeland security this 
afternoon. The order is, I believe, 12 or 12:30?
  Mr. REID. Yes, at 12 noon, with Senator Byrd having the floor.
  Mr. BYRD. At 12 noon, at which time, under the unanimous consent 
order entered last evening, I will get recognized.
  Now, I intend to explain my amendment clearly because my amendment is 
not adversarial to the Lieberman bill. My amendment improves, in my 
judgment--and I think people will agree once they really understand my 
amendment--the Lieberman amendment, the Lieberman bill. Therefore, I

[[Page 16765]]

will be explaining my amendment. That is in answer to the question of 
the distinguished Senator.
  At that time, if he wishes me to yield to ask questions about 
homeland security, that will be fine, but I intend to take some time 
this afternoon. At that time, the Senator can speak. As far as I am 
concerned, if Senators are going to speak on the Interior bill at this 
time, why, the Senator could get unanimous consent to speak out of 
order. I do not believe the Pastore rule has run its course yet. So the 
Senator could get consent to speak out of order for 10 minutes, 20 
minutes, whatever he wants, and nobody is around here to object.
  Mr. REID. Will the Senator from North Dakota yield for a question?
  Mr. DORGAN. I am pleased to yield to the Senator from Nevada for a 
question.
  Mr. REID. We have the two managers of the Interior bill here now. We 
have approximately an hour until we go to the homeland security bill. I 
have looked to staff, and we have no amendments to clear at this time. 
That is my understanding. So it would probably be to everyone's 
benefit, because the cloture motion has been filed on the pending 
amendment, that we go off this bill.
  Mr. DORGAN. Yes.

                          ____________________