[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 8421-8423]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--S. 476

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at a time to 
be determined by the majority leader, after consultation with the 
Democratic leader, the Senate proceed to Calendar No. 22, S. 476, the 
CARE Act, and it be

[[Page 8422]]

considered under the following limitation: there be 4 hours of general 
debate, equally divided in the usual form; provided that the only 
amendments in order be the following: a managers' amendment, which will 
be at the desk; a Nickles amendment, conservation; provided further, 
that there be 30 minutes of debate on the amendments, equally divided 
in the usual form. I further ask consent that following the disposition 
of the above amendments, the bill be read a third time, and the Senate 
proceed to a vote on passage of the bill, as amended, with no 
intervening action or debate. I finally ask consent that no points of 
order be waived by virtue of this agreement, and that following passage 
of the bill, it be held at the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, reserving my right to object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. If the majority leader would respond, we had the 
opportunity to talk about this particular piece of legislation. Senator 
Santorum has taken out elements of the legislation that do not apply to 
the tax rules. And we discussed, and I think reached an understanding, 
that those charitable choice items that would pose significant issues 
with respect to church and state have been eliminated from the 
underlying bill.
  The bill we will consider is from the Finance Committee with simple 
tax provisions. And I know that Senator Santorum has indicated he would 
use his efforts, and your efforts presumably, in the conference to 
prevent the addition of those elements to which we have objected.
  And I would assume that despite your best efforts, if such elements 
were included within the bill when it came back in the form of a 
conference report, this Senate would not take up such a conference 
report. Is that a fair understanding?
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, the Senator from Rhode Island is correct in 
the nature of the discussion between the Senator from Pennsylvania, 
myself, and the Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. REED. Further reserving my right to object, I notice that in the 
managers' amendment there is language with respect to the Compassionate 
Capital Fund, which is not a tax-financed provision. It essentially is 
authorizing a program that was begun in the appropriations bill a few 
years ago.
  Questions have been raised with the use of these funds, et cetera. I 
wonder, in order to expedite this, if that particular provision of the 
managers' amendment could be either deleted or it could be placed in a 
position where a possible amendment could be raised.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, what I would prefer to do is refer that 
question to the manager of the bill because I am not familiar with that 
aspect of it. That will be Mr. Santorum, the Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, again, I am also operating on some 
knowledge, but not complete knowledge, of why this provision is in the 
managers' amendment. I am prepared to accept the underlying agreement; 
I just have this one question which I find, at this point, important 
with respect to this Compassionate Capital Fund.
  But as far as your assertions, which I appreciate, and the underlying 
legislation, I have no problem with this consent; it is just that one 
point about the managers' amendment.
  I don't know what you would like to do to try to resolve that, 
though.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I am not in a position now to withdraw that 
amendment at this juncture. I am simply not familiar enough with it. I 
understand there was an agreement that it be there as part of it. I 
think we can continue the discussion on Monday when we are back in. But 
right now, I am not in a position to withdraw that.
  Mr. REID. If the Senator would yield.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. If I could direct a question to the Senator from Rhode 
Island: Is this the understanding the Senator had with the Senator from 
Pennsylvania?
  Mr. REED. The understanding I had with the Senator from Pennsylvania, 
to be fair and accurate, did not reach the contents of the managers' 
amendment. It was my impression that the managers' amendment would 
simply be tax amendments with respect to the Internal Revenue Code and 
the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee.
  I am a bit surprised, frankly, coming this evening and seeing 
something that is not within the traditional scope of the Finance 
Committee. Perhaps I might be wrong. This is something I didn't expect, 
but I must be very fair and accurate that this was not an issue we even 
discussed.
  My presumption was that all the amendments would be strictly related 
to tax provisions and not to this Compassionate Capital Fund. I must 
say, I understand that the funds have been appropriated under the 
context of this Compassionate Capital Fund. This is an attempt to 
provide legislative language. I have not had a chance to look at the 
language. It is included within a managers' amendment without any 
opportunity to amend the managers' amendment. I am in an awkward 
position.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, if I could make a suggestion: If we could 
modify the leader's request that there be a motion to strike in order 
if the Senator from Pennsylvania can't work this out with the Senator 
from Rhode Island, this one provision.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we can check on that. It is my 
understanding that this has been available to the other side, that this 
had been agreed to. If not, at this juncture I am just not in a 
position to agree to a motion to strike.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the unanimous consent 
request?
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, once again, reserving my right to object, I 
think both the majority leader and the Senator from Pennsylvania have 
been operating completely in good faith, have made sincere efforts to 
respond to our concerns. At this juncture, I would hope we could work 
out, through an amendment to the consent, a provision at least to give 
us the opportunity to look at it. I, frankly, having just seen this, 
this evening, I don't know if this simply codifies what is already 
operating and is, in a sense, innocuous or something more. It is not my 
intention to try at this point to upset the agreement because I think 
it was reached after much effort on both sides. It is a good-faith 
agreement.
  I wonder if there is some way we can maintain the opportunity to look 
at this, agree to the consent this evening, look at it, and if it is 
something highly objectionable, at least have the opportunity to 
strike.
  I think the suggestion by the Senator from Nevada is a good one. 
Frankly, I must say I am not prepared at this moment to offer a 
conclusion as to whether this should be here or not. I am just 
surprised that a nontax item is included in the managers' amendment 
along with others that are relatively noncontroversial.
  Mr. REID. I apologize to the leader. If I could make a suggestion, I 
know how deeply the Senator from Pennsylvania feels about this 
legislation. I am confident he wouldn't do anything that was untoward 
purposely. So I hope the Senator from Rhode Island will accept this 
agreement, and we will work with Senator Santorum to see if something 
can be done. I will personally work with Senator Santorum to see if he 
would allow us a motion to strike, but that is not part of this deal.
  Mr. REED. If I may reclaim my time, again, both the leader and the 
Senator have been extremely cooperative and helpful in trying to reach 
this point. I understand that once this legislation is passed by the 
Senate, it will be placed on the desk, and there are procedural 
opportunities there, I believe, to try to address this at least to 
somehow get an opportunity to look at this measure. Also with the 
opportunity to look at this over the course of the next few days, my 
apprehensions might be misplaced and we can proceed forward. But I 
think, again, the intention and the

[[Page 8423]]

understanding we had have been met. I am just surprised about the 
inclusion of this particular position in something like a technical 
managers' amendment. Given the commitment the majority leader has made, 
certainly, about the overall status of this legislation, should it 
return from the other body, then I would not object to the consent at 
this time.
  Hopefully, over the next few days we will learn a little bit more 
about this compassionate fund and perhaps even deal with it if it is a 
problem on Monday.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, my response is that we will work in good 
faith with the Senator from Rhode Island as well as the assistant 
Democratic leader. I hesitate at this juncture to speak on behalf of 
the Senator from Pennsylvania. Again, we are committed on both sides to 
working in good faith. We have been able to do that to date. So I would 
ask once again for the unanimous consent as propounded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________