[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7239-7240]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 3550

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, in a moment I will propound a unanimous 
consent request with respect to the highway bill, but first let me 
explain to everybody where we are. We passed our version of the bill in 
the Senate on February 12 by an overwhelming majority, 76 to 21. 
Subsequent to that, the House passed their bill, H.R. 3550, on April 2 
by, again, an overwhelming majority of 357 to 65. That bill is now at 
the desk.
  Therefore, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
consideration of the House-passed highway bill, H.R. 3550; provided 
further that all after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of 
S. 1072, as passed, be inserted in lieu thereof; the bill then be read 
a third time and passed; further, the Senate then insist on its 
amendment, request a conference with the House, and the Chair then be 
authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate, with a ratio 
of 11 to 10.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  The assistant Democratic leader.
  Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, this is 
legislation I really understand. Senator Inhofe and a couple others 
worked hard to get this legislation passed. I would say, initially, 
this legislation could not have passed but for the support, under some 
very difficult times, of the majority leader. I commend him for his 
outward support and inward support. He supported us openly on the 
Senate floor and in all of the discussions we had off the Senate floor. 
I am very grateful for that.
  We have a very fine bill. The House bill is a bill that is OK. It is 
not as good as ours. But let me say this. We were moving along just 
fine on this legislation until, for reasons unknown to most people, the 
President said he is going to veto the bill if it is more than X number 
of dollars. Keep in mind that this legislation that passed the Senate 
does not create a single new tax. A vast majority of the money comes 
out of the trust fund to take care of this. It takes care of highways 
and transit--a good bill. It would create more than a million new 
jobs--high-paying jobs--directly.
  So I say to my friend, the distinguished majority leader, I believe 
if conferees were appointed tonight what we would do is the Senate 
would designate staff people to work on this bill with the House 
people. I would suggest--and I don't care what it is called; call it 
whatever you want to call it--our staffs should start working on this 
legislation.
  It is obvious, because the Speaker has indicated why he does not want 
this bill. He said he does not want his Members to have to cast a tough 
vote. Mr. President, 357 to 65--I served in the House. I know how many 
votes it takes to override a veto. Over here I know how many votes it 
takes to override a veto. This bill is a good bill, and the majority of 
the House and the Senate would vote to override the President's veto. I 
believe the President, when confronted with the facts of what good 
legislation this is, would not veto the bill anyway, with the need for 
creating jobs. But I would hope the majority leader would allow the 
staffs to begin working on this to see if we can get to a point where a 
conference committee can be appointed. I want this bill to pass. I 
think it is something that needs to pass for our country. But I would 
hope we don't get in a position where our staffs can't work on this. I 
am sure the majority leader knows the staffs have already had one 
productive meeting. We could have a couple more and maybe get to the 
point where the majority leader would be satisfied that the staffs are 
doing the right thing, in his estimation. I would be happy to talk to 
my distinguished leader. He knows my interest in this bill. Hopefully, 
we would get it passed.
  I apologize, this late in the evening, for talking as long as I have. 
But I object.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we are in a unique situation, as you just 
heard explained quite well. This is a bill I very much want. It is a 
nonpartisan bill about which this body has spoken very loudly. I 
appreciate the leadership of my colleague from Nevada on this

[[Page 7240]]

bill. We are very proud of the product we have produced. My whole 
intention of coming to the floor, which is the normal process, to 
appoint conferees, Republican and Democratic conferees, is to continue 
in an orderly fashion and bring the bill to completion so it is law, 
not just a bill. We passed it February 12. The House passed it on April 
2. We passed two extensions of the previous highway bill already and 
the deadline for the next temporary extension will be next Friday. We 
will have to do it once again.
  I am working very hard so we can have a conference committee, and we 
can't have a conference committee until we have conferees. It is time 
to act on the highway bill.
  As the distinguished assistant Democratic leader said, over a 
million, and I would say 2 million, new jobs will be created by this 
bill. It is vital to our economy. It is vital to the Nation's 
infrastructure. Regular order would be for us to appoint conferees. We 
will continue to work, having heard the objection, in regular order 
which, in my mind, would accelerate passage of the bill. We will 
continue to work with the other side, although I am disappointed we 
cannot proceed with this regular order. But I am committed to the bill. 
The assistant Democratic leader is. Over 70 Members of this body are. 
So we will continue to work diligently in that regard.

                          ____________________