[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 4]
[Senate]
[Pages 5548-5549]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I would like to make brief comments 
concerning the status of the Energy and Water appropriations bill, 
following the actions of the majority leader. I said most of what I had 
to say earlier.
  Here is my view of it. Tonight, and for the third time, the Senate 
voted not to end debate on the Energy and Water appropriations bill, 
even though we have virtually finished all of our work on it. We have 
one difference of opinion, and it is a big one. It is provocative. It 
is the Cotton amendment that would prohibit U.S. tax dollars being used 
next year to purchase heavy water from Iran.
  The majority leader has filed cloture on the Cotton amendment, which 
means that after tomorrow--the intervening day--we will have a vote on 
the Cotton amendment on Wednesday. We will dispense with it the way we 
usually dispense with issues about which we have large differences of 
opinion: We vote on them. Sometimes we can work them out, sometimes we 
can withdraw them, and sometimes we can't. So we are going to vote on 
it. Senator Cotton has said that if he should not win the amendment, he 
will withdraw it. That will dispose of the Cotton amendment, and then 
we can move on and finish the Energy and Water appropriations bill.
  I said earlier today, and I will reiterate, that while I have 
defended Senator Cotton's right to offer his amendment--it is germane 
and it is relevant--I will vote no on his amendment for two reasons. 
One reason is I believe it raises the possibility that if the United 
States is not allowed to buy heavy water from Iran, then it puts it on 
the international market and it could be purchased by other countries, 
such as North Korea, for use in making nuclear weapons.
  This is not a vote for or against the Iran nuclear agreement. I am 
opposed to that agreement. This is a question about what to do about 
the heavy water that Iran has, which it has to get rid of, which can be 
used either for peaceful purposes, which we use it for in the United 
States when we have it--we use it for the neutron microscope at the Oak 
Ridge Laboratory, we use it for fiber optics, we use it for MRI 
imaging, we use it in a variety of ways--or it can be used to make 
plutonium and nuclear weapons. Now is not the time to be increasing the 
possibility that heavy water from Iran could be put on the 
international market and sold to a country such as North Korea, which 
might use it to make nuclear weapons. That is No. 1.
  No. 2, while the amendment is relevant and germane, this is an 
amendment that ought to be considered first in the Foreign Relations 
Committee or the Armed Services Committee. I get a lot of lectures 
sometimes in our Republican lunches about appropriators making 
decisions that ought to be in the authorizing committee. Well, this is

[[Page 5549]]

one of them. If there were an issue that raises more such complex 
national security issues, it would be hard to think of one. Might this 
heavy water be used by a country to make nuclear weapons or, on the 
other hand, if we purchase it, does it create a market or an incentive 
for Iran to produce more heavy water? What happens to India, which 
produces heavy water? What happens to Argentina? What happens to the 
need of the United States for heavy water, since we don't produce it at 
all, yet we need it? Iran produces it. We don't want them to have it. 
We don't produce it. We need it. We don't want North Korea to have it. 
These are complex national security issues that ought not to be decided 
on an amendment to this bill.
  I will be voting no on the Cotton amendment because of the fear that 
it might create the possibility that putting it on the international 
market would put this distilled water, which could be used peacefully, 
in the hands of those who might make a bomb with it, and because I 
think an appropriate way to handle it is to first allow the Foreign 
Relations Committee or the Armed Services Committee to deal with it.
  This is a sincere amendment. I have defended the right of the Senator 
from Arkansas to offer his amendment. My friends on the other side 
don't like the amendment. They see it as provocative. They see it as a 
poison pill. That is a difference we will just have to work out over 
time.
  This is the U.S. Senate. The right way to work out differences we 
can't otherwise work out is simply to vote. The majority leader has 
made sure we will have a vote on the Cotton amendment by Wednesday.
  My hope is that as important as this Energy and Water appropriations 
bill is, that Senator Feinstein and I could work with the Democratic 
leader and the Republican leader and others to see if we might not 
agree tomorrow on a way to vote on the Cotton amendment and finish the 
bill.
  As I have said earlier, 80 different Senators have important 
provisions in the bill. I know that. I know they are important because 
many of my colleagues went home over the last week and took credit for 
passing them, even though we have a little more work to do.
  So while we have one difference of opinion left--and it is a big 
one--I think the majority leader has put us on a path to come to 
resolution by Wednesday, and I hope by tomorrow.
  Let me conclude by thanking Senator Feinstein. She feels as 
passionately about this as Senator Cotton does. Maybe she feels more 
passionately about it. I respect and understand that, but I also 
respect the fact that she and I are bringing the first appropriations 
bill to the floor, and it is our basic constitutional duty to do so. We 
haven't had an Energy and Water appropriations bill make it all the way 
across the floor under regular order since 2009. That is not the way 
the railroad is supposed to run around here. We need to show the 
American people that we can resolve our differences and come to a 
result, so we will do that. We will have a vote, and then we will 
finish the bill. I hope we can do it tomorrow.
  I look forward to continuing my discussions with the Senator from 
California and other interested Senators to get it resolved.
  I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise to thank the distinguished 
chairman of the subcommittee for his views and for his very instructive 
actions to move this bill to fruition. I know we both think it is an 
important bill. We know the subject that Senator Cotton has raised is 
also important.
  I think there has been a good discussion on it and understanding of 
the pros and cons, so I think now we can wait until Wednesday, an hour 
after we come in, for the vote, and we will see what the will of the 
Senate is.
  I want the chairman to know I am very grateful for the actions he has 
taken because this is enabling us to pass the bill and see it enacted 
into law, we hope.
  So thank you very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.

                          ____________________