[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 17]
[Senate]
[Pages 23303-23304]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES TO S. 2845

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I want to discuss with the Democratic 
leader the appointment of conferees to S. 2845, the 9/11 legislation.
  I am so proud of the Senate's work on this legislation as anything we 
have done these past 2 years. Chairman Collins, ranking member 
Lieberman, and all Senators did a superb job in moving this bill 
forward.
  There was no partisanship in their Committee and they developed a 
bill that has been endorsed by both the 9/11 Commissioners and many of 
the family's personally affected by the 9/11 attack.
  The Democratic leader and I have worked closely together throughout 
this process, and I appreciate his leadership and cooperation. Now I 
hope we can complete the process by appointing conferees today and 
reaching a final agreement with the House as quickly as possible.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I thank the majority leader for his kind words and for 
his exemplary work on this bill. Both the process and substance of the 
Senate bill reflect upon the best traditions of the Senate, and the 
Leader deserves enormous credit for that.
  Our side wants to appoint conferees and send a bill to President Bush 
as quickly as possible. But many on our side have concerns about what 
will happen when we meet with the House.
  The Senate bill passed by a 96-2 margin. It was, as you said, a model 
of bipartisan cooperation from start to finish. And every Republican 
Senator voted for S. 2845.
  The House followed a different approach. Virtually every House 
Republican just voted against the bill that every Republican Senator 
voted for. So this could be a difficult conference.
  In addition, many on our side are concerned over the pattern that's 
emerged in conferences with the House.
  Almost a year ago Republican and Democratic Senators reached a 
consensus on an omnibus appropriations bill. But when we went to 
conference, that consensus gave way to the House demand that their 
position prevail. So Senate position on overtime, country-of-origin 
labeling, and other issues were dismissed.
  Earlier this year the Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation 
dealing with our Nation's pension system; the House passed a bill that 
had no bipartisan consensus.
  In that conference there was one outstanding issue regarding multi-
employer pensions. And despite the bipartisan consensus in the Senate, 
the House again demanded that the Senate position be dropped. And it 
was.
  Just last week, we had a conference on the FSC bill. This bill passed 
the Senate almost unanimously. But on critical issues dealing with FDA 
regulation and overtime provisions, the House conferees succeeded in 
demanding that the House position again prevail.
  So there is considerable apprehension on our side what will happen in 
this conference if the House again demands that its position be 
accepted. All of those previous bills were important, but I think we 
all would agree that nothing is more important than making our country 
safe from attack. We have to get this bill right and the Senate bill 
does that.
  Mr. FRIST. I have a markedly different view than Senator Daschle 
about some of his legislative history, but I understand his concern.
  We do have to get this bill right and our side is committed to that. 
We have to work together in conference just as we worked together in 
the committee and on the floor. I have talked with Senator Collins, who 
will lead the Senate conferees, and she has agreed that she will not 
pursue a conclusion to the conference, nor sign any conference report, 
that undermines the bipartisan working relationship that has existed in 
the Senate.
  If changes are made to the Senate bill, they will be the result of 
the mutual, good-faith effort to reach agreement among Senate 
conferees. Moreover, the Democratic leader has my commitment that 
should the process break down due to disagreements over either 
substantive matters or extraneous provisions, then I will not bring a 
conference report to the floor.
  We are prepared to make these commitments on our side, but want to be 
sure that we have your commitment to continue to work with us in good 
faith on this legislation and to complete action as quickly as 
possible.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I thank the majority leader for his comments and 
assurances. For the Senate to work effectively we need to be able to 
rely on each other's word. We accept your word that the Senate 
conferees will stay together, and you have my word that we will 
continue to work in good faith and do everything possible to complete 
action on this bill as soon as possible.
  As we act quickly we ought to make sure that we minimize logistical 
problems for the conferees.
  I think we can avoid scheduling difficulties if there is at least 48 
hours notice prior to meetings, and that there be an understanding that 
there will be ample time to meet and deliberate before decisions are 
made on significant matters. I hope that's acceptable to the majority 
leader.
  Mr. FRIST. I agree that's sensible and acceptable to our side.
  Mr. DASCHLE. I thank the majority leader and I am happy to yield.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I appreciate the statements of both of our leaders, and 
I think all Members understand the importance of this conference. I 
particularly appreciate the desire to work in good faith on these 
provisions. I have noted that in the House bill there are some 
extraneous provisions, particularly with regard to both immigration and 
refugees.
  There are important changes in asylum standards that turn back our 
tradition in terms of refugees, which has been more of an ideological 
position, but really it is unrelated to the challenges, to the threats. 
And there have also been very important provisions in terms of 
deportation that is to a far extent. We have not had any of those 
hearings on the Judiciary Committee, and those are very important 
issues and questions.
  I thank our leaders for their willingness to say that we want to work 
on what is the underlying legislation. There are extraneous issues that 
have been added in the House. If they were to come back and be as 
negative as

[[Page 23304]]

they are in the House bill, then it seems to me that it would fail to 
meet the kind of standards that have been outlined in good faith.
  So I thank both of our leaders for their excellent statements. I 
appreciate our leader raising these questions on some very substantive, 
important issues that are completely unrelated to the whole question of 
terrorism or intelligence. It would need a good deal of discussion here 
on the Senate floor before they were done.
  I thank the Senator.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from 
Massachusetts. I share his view about the importance of these matters 
and about the urgency with which we must work to ensure the completion 
of our work on the same bipartisan basis that we demonstrated to pass 
the bill here on the floor.

                          ____________________