Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be considered and agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. First, let me compliment the distinguished majority leader, Senator Dole, for the way in which he is keeping the interests of the Senate in negotiations that are taking place on this resolution, not only regarding the continuing resolution, but the effort to get some commitment from the administration to support the effort and be an actively engaged partner in the effort to achieve a balanced budget. That is really what is at the heart and soul of the dispute between the Congress and the administration at this time. We know some innocent people are sort of caught in the crossfire. That is unfortunate. I think that the majority leader's assurance to those who are being disadvantaged and put at some financial risk as a result of this impasse ought to be reassured by the statements of the leader. There has been a lot of speculation. I know the distinguished Senator from Virginia has voiced concerns about how we go about making amends, or making sure that there is not an unfair result for some of those who have been laid off or furloughed temporarily. The fact is, I think there is some misunderstanding about the situation. There is a commitment, as the majority leader has stated, to help make sure that those problems are resolved and that they are resolved as a part of this negotiation. We hope that is the case. Some people have said, and they have called in saying, ``If people are not essential, if they are not necessary to the operation of the Government, why do you have them on the payroll to start with?'' That is not the definition of this situation. That is, that there are some who are considered essential for the protection of life and property. That is the definition. I think that is why there is the misunderstanding, those whose presence and whose active involvement on the payroll or on the job is necessary for the protection of life and property are considered essential under this situation. The President, however, has the obligation to make that definition in many cases. He has a good deal of leeway in making those decisions. I think people recognize that after the first furlough and first definitions, within the Departments there have been some changes. Some who were considered not necessary or essential for the protection of life and property have been summoned to come back to work, who were not first considered essential. So, this is a situation that does not happen every day. It is very unusual. It is out of the ordinary. No wonder there is some wonderment or bewilderment, confusion, about this situation. I think all can be assured that certainly this Senate is going to continue to look out for the interests not only for those who have been put at some financial disadvantage, but also the American people as a whole, and the interests of States. We are here representing State governments as well. That is one of the original roles of the U.S. Senate. We have two Senators per State so each State can be equally and fairly represented. So the interests of local governments are being taken into account in this process, too. The point I am trying to make is that although there are some anxieties and although there is some confusion, no one should be confused about what the goal is. That is, to get this dispute resolved as quickly as we can and as fairly as we can and without compromising our commitment to achieve a balanced budget. That is the whole purpose of this. We are sorry the dispute has turned into what some are characterizing as a political game or of one-upmanship, one trying to outdo the other with public rhetoric and news releases and the like. There is some very serious and hard work going on, and all through the weekend, and has been going on the last several days. I hope we can resolve it today. Everyone here is paying a very serious commitment in that direction. I yield the floor.

Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the Senator for his leadership in this effort. He has been stalwart in always helping us resolve these difficult situations. That has certainly been the case in this instance, as well.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. I thank the distinguished Senator for yielding. My question was simply to refer to the statement he made, and to ask him whether or not on the Star Schools issue he realized that in the Senate committee that has jurisdiction over education we recommend in the bill that we tried to call up the other day that Star Schools be funded at the same level that it was funded last year; that the House provided no funding in their bill. And the suggestion of the Senator from North Dakota though is this continuing resolution, if it passed, would zero out Star Schools. The program is forward funded anyway. But in the Senate bill, which the Democrats refused to let us bring up when they refused to permit us to agree to the motion to proceed to the bill, would fund that program at the same level that was funded at last year.

Mr. COCHRAN. Let me just ask, about the tax cut----

Mr. COCHRAN. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. COCHRAN. I yield 4\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished Senator from Utah, [Mr. Bennett].

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I understood that I yielded 6 minutes to the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire and that that would leave us 10 minutes of time.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I yield the distinguished Senator an additional minute to respond to the question of the Senator from North Dakota.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, it is my understanding that the majority leader has asked me to control the time on this side of the aisle. I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire, Senator Gregg.

Mr. COCHRAN. Does your amendment say there will be a balanced budget in 7 years, that that is the commitment that is being made by the Democrats to achieve a balanced budget in 7 years?

Mr. COCHRAN. And if I could ask.

Mr. COCHRAN. But not making any commitment to achieve a balanced budget?

Mr. COCHRAN. The Senator is taking out all of the language in the resolution completely?

Mr. COCHRAN. I thought it was just changing the date.

Mr. COCHRAN. Without any change in the content of the resolution?

Mr. COCHRAN. My question is, if this amendment is adopted, that we vote for it, would you recommend it to the President?

Mr. COCHRAN. My understanding is that the amendment the distinguished leader has offered has simply extended the date of the resolution, as offered, to well over into December rather than----

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Democratic leader. My question is this: The Democratic leader's amendment seeks to extend the time for the continuing resolution. My question is whether you support the continuing resolution with this change and would recommend that the President sign it.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. COCHRAN. I will be happy to respond to my good friend. This is not a debate over how we balance the budget. It is a debate over whether or not we ought to commit ourselves to working together to achieve a balanced budget. That is the provision in this resolution.

Mr. COCHRAN. We are not debating how we get to the balanced budget, is my response. That is what you are trying to convert this into, is a debate over tax cuts. This is a debate on getting the Government functioning, is it not true? That is what the continuing resolution is about.

Mr. COCHRAN. I was just going to ask the Senator if there is any tax cut in this bill? This is a continuing resolution that provides, is it not true, for 3 weeks for a cooling-off period to fund Government and get everybody back in the agencies and departments? There is not anything in this resolution that would require any tax to be cut, is that not true?

Mr. COCHRAN. He yielded to you for a question.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.