Kit Bond

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be agreed to, the bill be considered read the third time, and passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, all without any intervening action or debate.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, for information of all Senators, there will be a series of votes beginning at 9 a.m. on Friday, with all succeeding votes in the series be limited to 10 minutes each. Hopefully, that series of votes will include passage of the HUD-VA appropriations bill. The Senate is also expected to consider the legislative appropriations bill. However, any votes ordered with respect to Legislative Branch bill will be postponed to occur on Tuesday, July 21, at a time to be determined by the two leaders.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I now ask the Senate stand in adjournment under the previous order.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I listened with great interest to all of the wonderful and exciting things my colleague from Alabama said about the space program. He made very telling points about how this is the future and motivation of our children, this is a symbol for the next century. There are many, many, many good things about our space program. As a matter of fact, I agree with almost everything he said about how important the space program is, and I think my colleague from Maryland agrees. And, frankly, that is why in a very extremely tough budget, when the President recommended $13.465 billion for NASA, we recommended we appropriate $13.615 billion for NASA. Now, these are the people who are running NASA. They say all they want is $13.465 billion. And we said, ``No. You've got to do better. You are going to take another $150 million beyond what the folks who are running it--under the direction of the Director of OMB--have asked for. We are increasing it. And we think that is very important.'' Unfortunately, we have had to make these choices in a budget where we had to restore an 83-percent cut in elderly housing, the section 202 elderly and assisted housing, the supportive housing that was savaged by Secretary Cuomo and the administration. We have had to restore money for veterans' health care where that was cut. Frankly, we have reached the accommodation on a very difficult bill. And we have agreed to maintain the funding at the National Service and AmeriCorps. And as part of, I think, an overall responsible approach to the budget for all of these agencies we work on, and, in addition, to assure that the administration will be able to sign the bill--because without the administration signing the bill, it does not do us any good to go through the drill of coming up with a totally different set of priorities than they have--we have kept in funding for National Service and AmeriCorps. Therefore, I commend the Senator for his enthusiasm for NASA. I do not believe it is feasible to achieve it. Therefore, I move to table the amendment, and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I, too, thank the Senator from Nebraska for his willingness to withdraw the amendment. This is not a productive road we are going down. But we are willing to work with both Senators from Nebraska because the points they make raise some very serious issues that need to be addressed by the EPA and by the authorizing committee with staff. I hope that we can bring them together and perhaps we can come out of the conference with report language that will outline a solution, or at least we can work with the authorizing committees and the other scientific entities to find out if the science on which the EPA is relying is adequate. Also, as I believe I mentioned, the EPA has said there are flexibility options under the existing programming in which Nebraska could take advantage. I cannot tell the Senator what those are, but we can find out and present those to the Senators so that a determination can be made if the problem can be solved by flexibility that EPA will utilize. At this juncture, at this time of night, we can't say what it will be, but we certainly assure the Senator that we will work to find, to explore every avenue to bring the relief the Senator seeks.

Mr. BOND. I thought we tried to emphasize, we are willing to do anything we can the next opportunity we have. We have already stated on the floor that we would urge the assistant administrator to come out. He has talked in his letter about flexibility being available for the State of Nebraska. The EPA contends that there are a number of remedies available. I would certainly urge my colleagues on the Environment and Public Works Committee to work with you and the State of Nebraska to see if there are accommodations that can be made. We can work with you. And based on what we learned from the authorizing committee--the majority and minority--we might put language in the report directing or asking that steps be taken. But, frankly, that is not going to be bill language. But we are willing to work with you and with the ranking member and the chairman of the authorizing committee.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, we don't have further report language we can offer.

Mr. BOND. In the conference.

Mr. BOND. If the Senator from Nebraska would yield, we are willing to try to be as helpful as we possibly can. I have outlined for him the position in which we find ourselves. We are not going to be able to accept the amendment that is proposed. We have gone through that. The EPA has filed a letter that is now on the record objecting to it. That is not going to change. The Senator can speak as long as he wishes. But he is not going to change that position from my standpoint. If the Senator is willing to work with us--we can't do report language here. We can do report language in the committee and attempt to work with him on getting report language and seeing what we can encourage the authorizing committee to do. I have said we would be willing to ask the EPA Administrator to go out there. We don't direct and we cannot control the EPA. I think that is clear. You know what the political situation is. Frankly, continuing to talk on the floor tonight when others are waiting to offer amendments is not going to encourage us to work with the Senator from Nebraska on the very compelling problem he has. But we would be willing to help him. But talking about it on the floor at greater length is not going to further the process of cooperation and assist us in working out report language or some alternative means by which we can encourage the EPA to come to an agreement with the State of Nebraska.

Mr. BOND. The Senator is correct. You have made a very compelling case. We have expressed our views. I was suggesting that other Senators also have amendments to offer. Quite frankly, the people who wish to hear this can read this in the Record. They will be able to do so. But there are other people waiting.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I might ask the Senator from Nebraska. He obviously has made some very compelling points. It is noted there are Senators who are waiting to offer amendments. If he would be willing to do so, I would like to finish up the work of the Senators who are waiting, and I will move to table the amendment, and then I will offer to go back in morning business and afford the Senator from Nebraska as much time as he wishes, because we have heard the compelling arguments--the situation is very clearly that with the authorizing committees opposing this, the agency opposing it, it is our policy not to accept these amendments on an appropriations bill. His arguments are made with a great deal of passion and common sense, but they are not going to be accepted, and he will have an opportunity to appeal to our colleagues in a colloquy or in discussions later this evening, or in the 1 minute tomorrow. Would that be acceptable to the Senator from Nebraska?

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I will tell you briefly why this amendment is going to have to be opposed and why I think it will be defeated and move to table it, because we do have other amendments to go on to tonight. Obviously, the Senator can seek the floor later on if he has not finished. If he has finished with his argument, I am happy to respond briefly. The chairman and/or ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee will be here tomorrow to express their opposition, and I will print in the Record tonight the letter from the Environmental Protection Agency which says the EPA is strongly opposed to this amendment. Unfortunately, Mr. President, the Senator has some compelling arguments. I sympathize with his frustration, but the EPA said, ``We believe it is unnecessary, inconsistent with the policy requirements of the 1996 amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act and harmful to the protection of the public health.'' He goes on to cite articles. He does state that, ``The State of Nebraska has yet to avail itself of several opportunities for substantial flexibility and assistance described herein,'' and the EPA Assistant Administrator, Robert Perciasepe, has offered to go to Nebraska and show up in Hastings. I think my colleague from Maryland and I will urge him in the strongest possible terms to coordinate his schedule with yours and go to Hastings and other towns to answer. But the fact of the matter is that there is a strong objection by the EPA to this. That objection is supported by the members of the authorizing committee. In our appropriations measures, we have not, we do not, and we will not take authorizing measures or legislative matters which are strongly opposed by the authorizing committee. We believe as a courtesy to the committees of jurisdiction that we should not do it. We have not done it and we don't intend to do it.

Mr. BOND. I thank the Senator from Rhode Island. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I commend the Senator from Rhode Island because there is no question about the dangers of lead-based paint, what hazards they present. This is a critical program. The program is funded at $60 million. The Senator's amendment will increase it to $70 million. There is a great need to reduce lead-based paint hazards for children. As the Senator has pointed out, some of the statistics of lead-based paint and the dangers in some of our more mature urban areas is really frightening. I believe the figures are that there are some $3 billion in housing rehabilitation needs existing out there to address all of the lead-based paint problems in the country. It is our desire to accept the amendment on this side. The funding will be taken from the overall CDBG funding of $4.75 billion, which is $75 million over last year's level. We are willing to accept it on this side.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I think the distinguished Senator from Colorado wishes to speak on this. Has the Senator from North Carolina spoken yet? I believe he also wishes to speak. And then I believe we are ready to go on to the amendment by the Senator from Rhode Island. So I thank the Chair.

Mr. BOND. I urge my colleagues, when the vote is held on this very important amendment tomorrow morning, that they oppose this amendment. I believe the time has come to provide this modest increase in the loan limits, and I hope our colleagues will support the committee in this effort. I yield the floor. Mr. KOHL addressed the Chair.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I express my appreciation to the Senator from Wisconsin. We are now ready for the amendment by the Senator from Oklahoma. The Senator from Rhode Island has an amendment to go after this one. I ask the Chair to recognize him after this amendment has been dealt with.

Mr. BOND. I would be happy to join in asking for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, the Senator from Alaska presents a very compelling case. As a Senator interested in that area, I can see the importance of the case he makes. The problem is, this deals with a subject matter over which this subcommittee does not have primary jurisdiction, and therefore I would have to say, No. 1, I cannot comment on or respond properly to the views of the appropriate appropriations subcommittee, nor could I respond to the questions that might be raised by the authorizing committee. The Senator has advised us that we do not have the scoring from CBO. He has assured us it will be minimal. Frankly, this bill is very close to our limits, and if the scoring turns out to push us over the allocations, we will have to raise a Budget Act point of order. So I urge the Senator to talk with the chairman of the Appropriations Committee--the chairman and ranking member, and the chairman and ranking member of the appropriations subcommittee, and seek their counsel on it. We will be happy to have a vote on it or to deal with it tomorrow. While it does involve veterans, the subject matter is not one which is within the expertise of this subcommittee, and we do need to hear from the other appropriations subcommittees and the authorizing committee on it.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I think the Senator from Alaska has another amendment. I was going to say that I believe the Senator from New Mexico, the chairman of the Budget Committee, will raise a point of order tomorrow. As the Senator from Minnesota knows, the Senator from Maryland and I have supported his position. There will be a Budget Act point of order. But I ask for the yeas and nays on Senator Wellstone's amendment.

Mr. BOND. Might I ask for clarification? I ask the Senator which amendment he has that he wants to discuss.

Mr. BOND. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, this amendment by Senator Sarbanes and Senator Mikulski affects the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation, which is a federally chartered corporation dedicated to helping families of fallen firefighters in assisting State and local efforts to recognize firefighters who die in the line of duty. The Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Fire Administration, is a member of the foundation's board. Senator Sarbanes sponsored the original legislation creating this foundation. His amendment, along with Senator Mikulski, makes some technical changes to the law and eliminates the cap on staff. We understand it has been approved by FEMA. It has been cleared by the Commerce Committee. It would have no impact on spending and will ensure that the foundation is able to employ the staff it needs to operate. I urge adoption of the amendment, and I yield to the sponsors.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be dispensed with.