[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 23293-23294]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   RECOGNITION OF THE MINORITY LEADER

  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Democratic leader is recognized.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I see the Senator from New Mexico is 
ready to speak, as well, and I will be brief.
  We had a caucus last night, and I don't know that I can recall ever 
having witnessed the depth of anger and deep-seated frustration 
expressed by all of our membership as a result of the scheduling 
decisions made with regard to the supplemental next week. It started 
with the decision that may have been necessary but made last week with 
regard to calling Ambassador Bremer to a hearing on Monday, the very 
day the hearing was scheduled in the afternoon. No Senators were 
notified ahead of time. Senators had very little time to prepare. Very 
few Senators could attend because they were out of town. Many expressed 
the view that this was orchestrated in a way to

[[Page 23294]]

minimize the amount of scrutiny and attention Mr. Bremer would receive.
  Throughout the week, similar experiences have been noted. And now we 
have a markup on Monday, when, again, Senators have made travel plans 
and the real prospect for a good attendance is minimal at best.
  The frustration, the anger, the venting that I witnessed, and that 
most people felt, was as palpable as any caucus I can recall holding in 
the 9 years I have been leader. I have not had the opportunity--I just 
tried to call the majority leader, and I will talk to him in private 
in, hopefully, a couple minutes, but I would ask that we reconsider 
holding that markup on Monday. I would ask that in the name of comity, 
but also in the name of just ensuring that there be an opportunity to 
do this right, it be postponed until Tuesday. I think we would actually 
accelerate the prospects of completing the work.
  I will guarantee you, there will be very little prospect for comity 
and accommodation as we go through this already very vexing and 
controversial supplemental request by the administration--in order for 
the Senate to complete its work, it is going to take cooperation. But 
when our caucus feels as jammed as they do, as shut out as they are, it 
will be very difficult to reach some degree of procedural 
accommodation. So I will tell you that this matter needs more thought. 
I would hope we could have more consultation. But I will say, unless 
something changes, this is going to be exceedingly difficult.
  So I only put the Senate on notice. And, again, as I said, I 
attempted to call the majority leader prior to the time I came to the 
Senate floor to impress upon him privately the same message I am 
sharing with our colleagues in this public way. We will have more to 
say about it later. But this matter has generated far greater anxiety 
and anger than virtually anything I have seen in a long time.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I note the Senator from New Mexico wants to 
comment on the guest Chaplain and he has to be at a funeral.
  We will talk privately. We have not had the opportunity to talk since 
their caucus, so we can handle our discussion privately and then come 
back to the floor.
  Again, my goal is simply to address this request in a manner where 
both sides are heard. We have done our very best this week to schedule 
it in terms of the hearings, and we have talked further about that.
  I do ask you to consider--because how much time we spend in hearings 
or in markups or on the floor does not matter to me as much as having 
people heard over a period of time--if the markup were delayed, will 
the Democratic side at least consider finishing this before we go out 
on our recess, given the fact that this is an emergency request from 
the President of the United States? We can, whenever it comes to the 
floor, start early, work late; if it is Monday morning, coming in, or 
Tuesday, or as soon as you would say, ``Well, the markup is OK,'' so we 
could finish this before we go out on vacation or recess when we have 
this emergency request here. Can we finish it next week?
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, again, I would respond to the 
distinguished majority leader in several ways.
  First of all, the Ambassador, in speaking to our caucus on Tuesday, 
noted he does not need this money until January. Now obviously one 
could make the case that there really is not any rush to do this in 
September.
  I would also say the House has not acted. Until the House acts--and 
they are not going to act until next week--many of my colleagues wonder 
what the rush is. If we are denied the right to offer amendments, there 
are those who could make a point of order that many of the amendments 
we will be offering involve legislating on appropriations because of 
the germaneness questions. And if that becomes an issue, then I doubt 
very much that there will be any way we can finish next week.
  As I think I heard the distinguished assistant Democratic leader 
note, this bill will come back, and we will have to have a second 
debate when the House bill comes to the Senate if points of order are 
raised on the amendments, denying us the opportunity to have this 
debate in the first place.
  So I guess my answer to the distinguished majority leader would be 
threefold: No. 1, will we have an opportunity to offer the amendments 
without points of order being raised against them? No. 2, when will the 
markup actually occur? And if it does occur on Monday, I fear there 
could be some procedural delays involved in bringing the bill up. No. 
3, we need to have a clear understanding of just when this legislation 
needs to be passed to accommodate the schedule Ambassador Bremer noted 
to our caucus. If we do not need to finish this until January, that is 
another matter. So some clarification with regard to the urgency of 
this issue also needs to be provided.
  I certainly will work with the majority leader as we follow through 
with these questions.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, let me turn to the Senator from New Mexico. 
I know he has a comment on the guest Chaplain, as well as other 
comments.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, could I make a unanimous consent request 
prior to the Senator from New Mexico beginning?
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time used 
by the Senator from New Mexico not be counted against the morning 
business time of the Republicans, and that the full 30 minutes be 
granted to each side due to this late start.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from New Mexico is recognized.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, first of all, might I say to my friends 
on the other side, I came with the intention of speaking about the 
guest Chaplain, who is from New Mexico. But I want to note we have an 
important event, a funeral for a 27-year-old son of one of our staffers 
from the Energy Committee at 10:15, so I will not be able to come back 
during that Republican time. So I would ask if I can----
  Mr. REID. That was my request. You have it right now.
  Mr. DOMENICI. I wonder if I could just give my speech on the guest 
Chaplain and also my other comments now.
  Mr. REID. That is what I asked in my unanimous consent request.
  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the Senator is 
recognized.

                          ____________________