[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Page 2703]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




               COMPREHENSIVE ADDICTION AND RECOVERY BILL

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have heard my friend the Republican leader 
the last couple of days talking about what a good bill we have here. He 
is right. It is something that is important to do. We have this opioid 
problem sweeping the Nation. It is in Nevada, as well as in all other 
States. All the other 49 States have the problem. So I understand the 
importance of this legislation. I only wish the Republicans had joined 
with us yesterday in voting for the Shaheen amendment, which would have 
provided real money to meet the requirements of this legislation, if it 
passes.
  I also know my friend keeps talking about the money we have already 
appropriated. We did it because there was an emergency then, and there 
is one now. The programs we have appropriated money for are totally 
separate and apart from this legislation. That is why Senator Shaheen 
offered her amendment. It was emergency funding that we badly need. So 
it is too bad my friends on the other side of the aisle are talking 
about taking money from other programs and funding this program. That 
isn't how it should be.
  This is a scourge sweeping the country. We have programs in this new 
legislation that need to be funded, otherwise it won't have any meaning 
whatsoever to the problem we are facing in the country.
  A number of Democrats have also tried to offer amendments. To this 
point, they have been able to offer one amendment and vote on one 
amendment. We have had more than 60 amendments filed over here. I know 
we are not going to have the ability to debate and vote on 60 
amendments, but my friend the Republican leader has been out here 
boasting time and again about this robust amendment process, and it is 
only talk. We haven't had a robust amendment process.
  I wouldn't think robust would mean having seven or eight amendments. 
We would accept a new definition of robust, I guess, if we got to offer 
a few amendments, but we should be able to offer amendments on this 
legislation.
  So I hope the Senate will be able to have a full and open amendment 
process on this legislation. If not, we may not be able to proceed to 
vote on this legislation, and it would be too bad. Even though the 
legislation is not funded properly, we should pass it. We are not going 
to pass it if we get jammed, and that is what is happening.

                          ____________________