[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 20]
[Senate]
[Pages 28004-28005]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 1806

  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, there is an issue that has been rule 
14'd and is on the calendar, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms 
Act, which has 54 cosponsors. It overwhelmingly passed the House back 
in April 285 to 140. This legislation is important to millions of 
Americans who want to be able to exercise their second amendment 
rights. There is simply no reason we should not be able to complete 
action on this bill expeditiously--there are not many measures around 
here that have that many cosponsors--that is, unless people want to 
delay its consideration with unrelated amendments.
  In an effort to address this matter fairly and efficiently, I have 
indicated to my good friend and colleague, the assistant Democratic 
leader, that I will propound the following consent request as a way to 
possibly expedite consideration of this measure which is supported by a 
substantial majority of our colleagues on a bipartisan basis.
  Therefore, Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to 
be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the 
Democratic leader, the Senate proceed to consideration of S. 1806; that 
there be 6 hours of general debate on the bill equally divided; that 
the only amendments in order be two relevant amendments offered by each 
side, with each first-degree amendment subject to a second-degree 
amendment which shall be relevant to the first degree amendment; 
provided further that each first-degree amendment be limited to 1 hour 
of debate evenly divided, and each second-degree amendment be limited 
to 30 minutes of debate equally divided; provided further that upon 
expiration of all time, the Senate immediately proceed to a vote on all 
pending amendments; after disposition of the pending amendments, the 
bill be read a third time, and the Senate immediately proceed to a vote 
on final passage, without intervening action or debate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REID. Madam President, I share the distinguished Senator's desire 
to pass this most important legislation. In fact, I am a cosponsor of 
this bill, which has been introduced on a bipartisan basis by Senators 
Craig and Baucus. This legislation would protect firearm and ammunition 
manufacturers from lawsuits related to deliberate and illegal misuse of 
their products. It will protect the rights of Americans who choose to 
legally purchase and use their products. So the legislation makes 
sense.
  As a gun owner since I was a young boy, I believe law-abiding 
citizens have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. I also 
believe the rights of the responsible gun owner should not be 
compromised or jeopardized by individuals who use firearms to commit 
crimes. The vast majority of Nevada gun owners use their guns safely, 
and I will work in a bipartisan fashion to safeguard their rights. I 
will work to pass this bill, and I think we have the votes to pass it.
  However, in a short time I will object to this consent request by my 
friend because it does not advance our shared goal of enacting this 
bill into law. In fact, this request, in my opinion, would set us back 
in our efforts to pass the legislation. We need to take the time 
necessary to debate and vote on the amendments that Senators want to 
offer to this bill, and then we need to pass it.
  I think this late in the session, with the constraints that are 
obviously present with everybody, it just would not help us. I will 
work with my friend and anyone else to get a unanimous consent 
agreement both sides can agree to.
  For now, on behalf of Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island and others, I 
object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. My friend from Nevada is certainly correct. At this 
late stage in the session, the only way we could advance this proposal 
to completion would be with a consent agreement that allowed us to deal 
only with relevant amendments. One of the concerns is that we could end 
up having amendments on minimum wage or hate crimes or other issues 
that are completely unrelated to the underlying subject matter. So it 
was my belief that the consent agreement I just offered was reasonable 
in the sense that it did allow relevant amendments to the underlying 
bill, but it also gives us an opportunity to reach completion.
  I want to modify my request a couple of more times and see if it 
might be more enticing to my good friend from Nevada. I modify my prior 
unanimous consent request as follows: That there be 8 hours instead of 
6, 8 hours of general debate on the bill equally divided, and that the 
only amendments in order be three relevant amendments offered by each 
side instead of two, with each first-degree amendment subject to a 
second-degree amendment which shall be relevant to the first-degree 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REID. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I really do 
believe we can work with Senators on our side and a few on the other 
side to come up with a reasonable approach to this legislation that I 
think has an outstanding chance of passing. We can't do it now. We are 
wrapping up this session of the legislature. Even though my friend has 
suggested relevant amendments, we need to take a little bit of time to 
work this through. The time that has been suggested by my friend is 
something that may or may not work.
  I just say to everyone within the sound of my voice, we need some 
time to work this out. We will be happy to cooperate in any way we can, 
but there are too many objections on this side to move forward at this 
time.
  On behalf of Senator Reed of Rhode Island and others, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, let me propound one last unanimous 
consent request, again bearing in mind that the only chance of moving 
this legislation forward this late in the session would be with a time 
agreement with relevant amendments. The underlying bill being supported 
by 54 cosponsors, we suspect well more than 60 are

[[Page 28005]]

advocating this legislation. Let me try to entice my good friend one 
more time by further modifying my second request in the following way: 
I ask unanimous consent that there be 10 hours of general debate on the 
bill equally divided, and that the only amendments in order be 4 
relevant amendments offered by each side, with each first-degree 
amendment subject to a second-degree amendment, which shall be relevant 
to the first-degree amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REID. Madam President, reserving the right to object, on certain 
issues, I am fairly easy to entice, but the fact is, on this, I have a 
significant number of Senators on this side who are not able to be 
enticed at this stage. On their behalf, I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, this is a very important piece of 
legislation that should be enacted in this Congress. It is apparent it 
will not be done in the first session of the 108th Congress. There are 
not many measures around here that have 54 cosponsors and probably with 
support well in excess of 60. I hope we can work together in the early 
part of the next session and advance this legislation to final passage, 
with relevant amendments, so it does not become a measure that attracts 
every single good cause some Senator may want to propose totally 
unrelated to the underlying question of whether gun manufacturers 
should be held responsible for acts perpetrated by individuals using 
their product--a fundamentally unfair trend developing in the country 
that should be stopped before it goes any further.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. REID. Madam President, if I may respond, I think the approach 
that we get into the legislation early next year is the way it will be 
passed. There will be a decision made early on by the leadership on 
both sides, I am sure, as to if it is necessary to attempt to invoke 
cloture on this matter. We will have lots of time early next year to do 
this.
  I look forward to working with my friend from Kentucky to move 
forward on this most important legislation.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, 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. McCAIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________