[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 148 (2002), Part 15]
[Senate]
[Pages 20903-20905]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--H.J. RES. 123

  Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the 
Senate receives a continuing resolution from the House, provided it is 
identical to H.J. Res. 123, the Senate proceed to consider the 
resolution, that it be read three times and passed, and the motion to 
reconsider be laid upon the table, all without intervening action or 
debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. I now ask unanimous consent that a copy of the resolution 
be printed in the Record upon the granting of this consent.
  There being no objection, the joint resolution was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                             H.J. Res. 123

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Public 
     Law 107-229 is further amended by striking the date specified 
     in section 107(c) and inserting in lieu thereof ``November 
     22, 2002''.

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, as we all know, Congress has not yet 
completed action on 11 appropriations bills. These bills fund such 
important domestic priorities as homeland security, education, and 
veterans medical care.
  In order to keep these important functions of Government up and 
running, we have already worked with the House to pass two continuing 
resolutions, the last of which expires on Friday.
  The House of Representatives has just passed and sent to the Senate a 
third continuing resolution. House Republicans are now proposing that 
we leave town and let the Government run on autopilot until November 
22.
  Why November 22? By picking a Friday a week before Thanksgiving, 
House Republicans are signaling they are not serious about completing 
the appropriations bills in November either. It will be extraordinarily 
difficult, in the several days before Thanksgiving, for us to get all 
the parties together to settle all the issues that have been insoluble 
for the past several months.
  The House Republican proposal seems designed to be on auto-pilot 
until next year, a recipe for a CR that starves basic Government 
programs essential to the health and well-being of millions of 
Americans. Indeed, several leading Republicans have indicated this is 
really their preference.
  Senators should not be under any illusion: a long-term CR will do 
just that. It will starve vital functions of Government. And you don't 
have to take my word for it. According to Representative Bill Young, 
the Republican chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, a long-
term CR, ``would have disastrous impacts on the war on terror, homeland 
security, and other important Government responsibilities.''
  Chairman Young wrote that sentence in a memo he sent to Speaker 
Hastert. The memo went even further, detailing the impact of a CR on a 
host of important domestic programs. Here is a sampling of what 
Chairman Young said will be cut: FBI, funding to hire additional agents 
to fight terrorism and to continue information technology upgrades 
would be denied; bioterrorism, no funding for President's $800 million 
initiative to increase funding for new basic bioterror research, to 
develop and test a new improved anthrax vaccine, and to assist 
universities and research institutions; first responders, no funding 
for President's $3.5 billion initiative to provide assistance to local 
law enforcement, fire departments, and emergency response teams; SEC/
corporate responsibility, insufficient funding to support current 
staffing requirements let alone significant staff increases needed to 
monitor corporate behavior; veterans medical care, long-term CR would 
leave veterans medical health care system at least $2.5 billion short 
of expected requirements; firefighting, $1.5 billion taken from other 
Interior Department programs to pay for firefighting costs will not be 
replaced; Pell grants, a freeze in this program will result in a 
shortfall of over $900 million; Medicare claims, no funding for the 
President's $143 million increase to ensure that the

[[Page 20904]]

growing number of claims are processed in a timely manner; Special 
Supplemental Feeding Program for WIC, funding would be reduced by $114 
million below current levels, meaning less will be available for 
families that depend on this program; Social Security claims, no 
funding for the President's increase to process and pay benefits to 
millions of Social Security recipients.
  In addition to the program cuts listed by Chairman Young, the House 
CR omits assistance for thousands of farmers all over this country who 
are confronting the worst drought in more than 50 years.
  This is the wrong way to do business. We should be completing our 
work on the bipartisan appropriations bills, not cutting education, 
veterans affairs, homeland security and other important priorities.
  Each of these bills properly funds key priorities. And, most 
importantly, each enjoyed the unanimous support of the Democrats and 
the Republicans on the Committee.
  There is no reason why the full Senate cannot do the same. Passage of 
these bills would fund Government for a year, with no need for any more 
stopgap, starvation diet CRs.
  Regretfully, our Republican colleagues in the House have refused all 
year to consider appropriate funding levels for crucial functions of 
Government, even though all Senators on the Senate Appropriations 
Committee, Democrats and Republicans, were able to agree on all 13 
bills.
  The difference between the aggregate total of spending for the 
bipartisan Senate bills and the aggregate total proposed by the House 
Republican budget resolution is roughly $9 billion in budget authority. 
That's a tiny fraction of the $5.6 trillion 10-year surplus that's been 
squandered since the current administration came to office.
  To hold up funding for all the non-defense areas of Government in 
order to claim credit for fiscal responsibility over such a tiny 
proportion of overall spending is the height of irresponsibility.
  Unfortunately, it is crystal clear that is precisely what our 
Republican colleagues would like to see happen. They want to run the 
Government on a starvation diet into next year. Because the House 
resolution is now the only way to keep the Government operating, it 
will be passed by voice vote. But I want to be very clear that, if 
there had been a recorded vote on this measure, I would have voted no.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, basically what we have just done is pass a 
continuing resolution until November 22. This is done with some 
trepidation and really with the complete understanding that this is not 
the right way to run Government. It would have been so much better had 
we been able to pass our appropriations bills. We have not been able to 
do that. We have 13 appropriations bills we should pass every year. I 
don't have the exact number, but I think following the passage of the 
Defense appropriations bill, we have passed four bills, maybe only 
three, leaving tremendous work that should have been done in committee.
  We have tried on a number of occasions to offer consent resolutions 
that we could pass the appropriations bills. Senator Byrd wanted to ask 
unanimous consent that we pass them all at once. They passed the 
Appropriations Committee unanimously; that is, Democrats and 
Republicans approved these bills. So it is just a shame.
  In fact, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, a 
Republican, sent a resolution to Speaker Hastert, which has been 
around. Other people have seen it. It is not very private. It is one of 
those things here in Washington that is about as private as going to 
Tysons Corner shopping--not very private. It is a memo to the Speaker 
from the chairman of the Appropriations Committee.
  Among other things, he says:

       A long-term continuing resolution (CR) that funds 
     government operations at FY02 levels would have a disastrous 
     impact on the war on terror, homeland security, and other 
     important government responsibilities.

  He sets out, in a four-page memorandum, all the things that would be 
hurt. He does list those, including Social Security, Pell grants, 
Medicare claims, a large number of items. And he leaves out a number of 
them that I personally believe and many Democrats believe are as 
important as those he lists in this memorandum that should be passed.
  Had this matter come before the Senate and there had been a rollcall 
vote, there is no question that a significant number of Democrats would 
have voted in opposition. That is the way things worked out. We could 
not be responsible for shutting down Government, because that is what 
it would have amounted to.
  We are doing this reluctantly. I hope that when we come back, 
Chairman Young prevails and at that time we can sit down and pass the 
appropriations bills. It is important to every State in the Union that 
we do this.
  There is a tremendous need to do things such as Government setup, 
such as pass the yearly appropriations bills. This is not the right way 
to fund Government.
  Some have said, including Senator Pat Moynihan, that this is a plan. 
These programs that they want to hurt, they can't do it head on, they 
can't do it directly, so they do it indirectly.
  I am glad that Government is going to be funded. We went through the 
Gingrich years where he and his compatriots shut down the Government. 
We are not going to do that. We are going to act responsibly. That is 
why we allowed this measure to go forward. But we do it with concern, 
reservation, and, as I have indicated, with trepidation.
  I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record the memorandum from 
Chairman Young and Speaker Hastert to which I referred.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                               Memorandum

     To: Speaker Hastert.
     From: Chairman C.W. Bill Young.
     Re: Impacts of a Long-term Continuing Resolution.
     Date: October 3, 2002.
       Pursuant to my October 1st correspondence regarding the 
     state of the appropriations process, I want to provide you 
     with further analysis of the potential impacts of a long-term 
     continuing resolution (CR). These projections assume a 
     current-rate CR excluding one time expenditures that extends 
     through February or March.
       A long-term continuing resolution (CR) that funds 
     government operations at FY02 levels would have disastrous 
     impacts on the war on terror, homeland security, and other 
     important government responsibilities. It would also be 
     fiscally irresponsible. It would fund low-priority programs 
     the President has proposed to eliminate.
       Homeland Security--The President has proposed a nearly $40 
     billion increase for homeland security in his FY03 budget. 
     None of these funds would be provided under a long-term CR. 
     Assuming Congress completes work on creating a Department of 
     Homeland Security, a long-term CR would leave this new agency 
     with very little resources to carry out its new mission.
       Projects--A long-term CR ensures that no Member of Congress 
     would receive a single project. The Committee has received 
     tens of thousands of requests for billions of dollars from 
     almost every Member of Congress.
       War Supplemental--It is likely that the first item Congress 
     will consider when we reconvene after the election is a major 
     supplemental to fund possible military operations in Iraq. It 
     would be highly problematic to expect the Congress to 
     complete work on 11 spending bills while working on an urgent 
     war supplemental.


               Homeland security impacts of long-term CR

       FBI--We would not have sufficient funding to hire 
     additional agents to fight terrorism and to continue IT 
     upgrades that will help the FBI ``connect the dots'' through 
     data mining proposals and other information infrastructure 
     enhancements.
       TSA--Efforts to improve aviation, maritime and land 
     security would be seriously curtailed. Port, cargo, and 
     trucking security would seriously deteriorate. If emergency 
     funds are excluded from the CR calculation (which is 
     historically the case), TSA would be under an annual rate of 
     $1.5 billion for the life of a long-term CR. This would be 
     only 28% of their FY03 budget request ($5.3 billion). At this 
     level, it is unlikely TSA could maintain their current 
     workforce of 32,000 screeners as well as air marshals. TSA 
     would likely face personnel RIF's. Most airports would not be 
     able to meet the deadlines for security improvements 
     established by Congress last December.
       Coast Guard--The Coast Guard is requesting a large ($500 
     million) budget increase in

[[Page 20905]]

     FY03, and much of this is to hire additional security 
     personnel, such as Maritime Safety and Security Teams to 
     patrol harbors and respond to suspicious activity. It also 
     includes funds to expand the sea marshal program, which 
     escorts DoD and high-risk commercial ships into port. Under 
     the FY02 level, these safety expenses would be deferred, or 
     would require diversion of funds from other critical missions 
     such as drug interdiction or search and rescue. Coast Guard 
     ``deepwater'' program is slated to expand from $500 million 
     in FY02 to $725 million in FY03. The contract was just signed 
     this past June. Under a long-term CR, the effort will have to 
     be scaled back due to lack of funding. This will impact 
     shipyards, design companies, aircraft manufacturers, and 
     integration companies, all around the country.
       Bioterrorism--President has proposed a nearly $800 million 
     increase for new, basic bioterror research, $250 million to 
     develop and test a new improved anthrax vaccine, and $150 
     million to assist universities and research institutions in 
     upgrading research facilities to conduct secure, 
     comprehensive research on biolgogical agents. None of these 
     important initiatives to combat, study and prevent bio-
     terrorism would be funded under a long-term CR.
       Border Patrol/INS--Efforts to deploy any additional Border 
     Patrol agents and immigration inspectors at land ports-of-
     entry along both the northern and southern borders would be 
     stalled. Likewise, construction projects that are necessary 
     to house these additional Border Patrol agents would be 
     delayed. No funding would be available to continue planning 
     and implementation of the INS' Entry Exit system, a program 
     designed to facilitate more secure and controlled access to 
     this country by non-U.S. citizens.
       First Responders--The President has proposed a new 
     initiative to provide $3.5 billion in assistance to local law 
     enforcement, fire departments and emergency response teams 
     across the Nation. No funds would be provided for this 
     program, one of the highest domestic security priorities for 
     the President and his Homeland Security advisor, Tom Ridge.
       Hospital preparedness--We would not have sufficient funds 
     to assist hospitals in making the necessary infrastructure 
     improvements and expansions so that they are prepared to 
     respond to bio-terrorism emergencies.
       Diplomatic security--We would not have the funds to hire 
     additional State Department security staff for deployment 
     overseas, or to carry out needed technical and physical 
     security upgrades.
       Office of Homeland Security--The Office of Homeland 
     Security was funded through the $20 billion supplemental. 
     Under a clean CR, this office would not be funded.


                  Programmatic Impacts of Long-term CR

       SEC/Corporate Responsibility--We would not be able to fund 
     current staffing requirements, let alone support significant 
     staff increases needed to fight corporate fraud and protect 
     investors.
       Veterans--The veterans medical care system will likely be 
     at least $2.5 billion short of expected requirements. 
     Veterans would be deprived of significant increases in 
     medical care proposed by the President and the House budget 
     resolution.
       NIH--We would not be able to scale-up significantly Federal 
     support for bio-preparedness research and development as 
     proposed by the President. Anthrax vaccine research and 
     development also would be slowed. It would forgo the nearly 
     $4 billion proposed for the National Institutes of Health 
     which is consistent with Congress commitment to double 
     funding for NIH over a set period of time.
       Foreign Operations--Afghanistan reconstruction, including 
     the famous Presidential ring road, would stall, increasing 
     chances that unrest and killings would resume there as the 
     Iraq matter comes to a head. It will severely cut the U.S. 
     contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis 
     and Malaria and reduce by 30% funds for Plan Colombia.
       Firefighting--Interior has already spent $1.5 billion on 
     firefighting above what provided in FY02. This has come at 
     the expense of other programs including Member projects. 
     These bills would not be paid under a long-term CR.
       Pay--All agencies would have to absorb Federal employee pay 
     increases due in January. This will make it much more 
     difficult for agencies to operate under a current rate and 
     result in widespread layoffs and furloughs.
       Pell Grants--A freeze in the Pell program will result in 
     the accumulation of a significant shortfall. There will be a 
     shortfall of over $900 million, even when factoring in the $1 
     billion supplemental appropriation provided to the program in 
     fiscal year 2002.
       DEA--We would be unable to hire new agents in response to 
     FBI restructuring, which shifted 400 FBI drug agents to 
     counter-terrorism. We have proposed to hire hundreds of new 
     agents to fight the war on drugs. Not a single new agent 
     would be hired under a long term CR leaving a significant gap 
     in the federal government's drug enforcement capabilities.
       GSA Construction--No new starts for any GSA line-item 
     construction ($630 million); would delay $300 million for 11 
     courthouse construction projects, $30 million for 6 border 
     station construction projects, and $300 million for 5 other 
     construction projects, including funds for consolidating Food 
     and Drug Administration facilities, a major Census building, 
     and the US mission to the UN in New York. Projects would 
     become more expensive due to inflation.
       Campaign Finance Reform--No funding for implementation of 
     the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act making it difficult for 
     the Federal Elections Commission to implement the reforms 
     signed into law by the President.
       Federal Prisons--Insufficient activation funds to four 
     Federal prisons that are scheduled to open in FY 2003, 
     exacerbating the already overcrowded conditions in the 
     Federal prison system.
       Medicare claims--We would not be able to provide additional 
     funding, as proposed by the President, to handle the 
     increased Medicare claims volume in a timely manner. The 
     President proposed a $143 million increase to adequately 
     process the growing number of claims. A long term CR would 
     significantly slow down the claims process and unnecessarily 
     inconvenience Senior Citizens who depend on Medicare.
       Yucca Mountain--A CR at the FY2002 enacted level of $375M 
     would significantly cut DOE's nuclear waste repository 
     program by over $200 million. This would cause real delays in 
     the scheduled opening of the facility.
       The Special Supplemental Feeding Program for Women, 
     Infants, and Children (WIC) would be reduced $114 million 
     from current levels. This would result in less assistance 
     being available for families who depend on this important 
     program, especially in uncertain economic times.
       The Food and Drug Administration would be reduced by $138 
     million which would result in immediate furloughs and RIFs 
     among newly hired employees responsible for enhanced 
     availability of drugs and vaccines, and for increased food 
     safety activities (primarily surveillance of imported food 
     products, an identified vulnerability).
       Social Security--The President also asked for a significant 
     increase in funds to process and pay benefits to the millions 
     of Social Security recipients.

  Mr. REID. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Dayton). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, my understanding is we are in a period of 
morning business. Is that right?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.

                          ____________________