Thad Cochran

Mr. COCHRAN

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

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I assume we are now on the Homeland Security appropriations bill for fiscal year 2005?

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, first of all, I thank the leadership for making available time in the schedule for the handling of this bill and giving us a chance to consider amendments that are proposed by other Senators to the bill as reported by the Senate Appropriations Committee. It is important to note that yesterday's action and the action of the full committee so far have set the tone for the consideration of this bill. First of all, to remind Senators, the bill contains funding at a level of $33.1 billion. Mr. President, $32 billion is for discretionary spending; the remainder is for mandatory programs or the allocation of funds that are collected under other provisions of law. This represents an almost 10-percent increase in funding for the next fiscal year as compared with the funding that is appropriated for this fiscal year, 2004. The fiscal year begins on October 1, as everyone knows. Substantial increases are included in this legislation for the activities of the Coast Guard as well as the Transportation Security Administration. The bill fully funds the President's requested activity for Project BioShield, which is a very important new endeavor to further enhance the security of our country against bioterrorism. The bill also provides funding for a new program that is designed to enhance security for our country by using new technologies to identify and verify visitors coming into the country using visas. This program is called United States Visitor and Immigration Status Indicator Technology. Of course, it has its own acronym, US VISIT, so it is easy for us to remember. One other feature of this year's appropriations bill is the limitation that we are provided as a result of a provision included in the defense appropriations conference report that limits, in effect, the discretionary spending of all appropriations bills for fiscal year 2005. The limitation is at a level of $821.9 billion. That is enforced through a mechanism of the Budget Act which permits points of order to be made on amendments that would seek to increase the bill's funding beyond the level of its allocation, which was established by the Appropriations Committee. We are pleased that the Senate has recognized the validity of that limitation. Yesterday we were able to exercise that point of order successfully to defeat amendments that would have increased spending beyond that allocated level of funding. We are at the limit of the allocation that is available to our subcommittee. The $32 billion in discretionary funding is the limitation that is provided to the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee. Today we are pleased to consider any other amendments Senators may wish to offer. We are ready to debate and dispose of amendments. We can agree to some, I hope, and we are happy to work with Senators throughout the remainder of this session. We are happy the leader has indicated that any votes that may be ordered will go over to next week. There will not be any recorded votes on this bill today. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, this amendment increases funding for the Department of Homeland Security fiscal year 2005 appropriations bill. It is fully offset by an extension of customs user fees to September 30, 2005. Specifically, this amendment will add funds for the following programs: $40 million for additional radiation detection devices, $40 million for additional border inspectors, $40 million for additional border patrol agents, $40 million for additional investigators, $40 million for detention and removals of illegal aliens, $81 million for additional rail and transit security grants, and $36 million for additional emergency management performance grants.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3578, As Amended

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

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I think this is a good plan. The Senate has done good work today. I think the outline the Senator from Nevada has given us is a thoughtful way to handle the bill. We will be here tomorrow morning and continue to make progress on the bill. We will be ready to cooperate with all Senators to the fullest extent possible.

Mr. COCHRAN. We appreciate the Senator from New York bringing this to the attention of the Senate. We know there is a tracking system in effect--but we are not sure it is as inclusive as he suggests we need it to be--for trucks that carry hazardous material. They try to keep up with that. They have a system in place. We are glad to have the chance to review this suggestion, and we will do that and hope the Senate will withhold action on this amendment tonight, and we can call it up tomorrow, or later, whatever the leaders end up deciding we will do in terms of further action on this bill. We are at a point where I think we are close to winding up the action on this bill today. We have had a full day of activity. A number of amendments have been presented and voted on. We appreciate the cooperation of all Senators in letting us know the identity of the amendments that were to be offered. We are going to continue to work hard to get this bill finished by sometime on Tuesday of next week. That is our goal, and I think we will be able to achieve that goal. One item we hope to be able to clear has been presented to the Senate by the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Allen, related to a survey in the State of Virginia on a mitigation issue surrounding flooding in the Richmond area. It is my hope that we will be able to get that passed, if we can, by a voice vote tonight, and then maybe go out if there is no further business. I yield to my friend from Nevada. Amendment No. 3610

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask that we agree to the Allen amendment on a voice vote.

Mr. COCHRAN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I have been advised that the other side wants to look at the amendment. I am happy for anyone who wants to look at the amendment to look at it. It was very coherently explained by the Senator from Virginia. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I commend the distinguished Senator for his explanation of his bill and for his initiative in calling attention to the needs of the area of his State in need of special attention from Federal agencies, particularly designing some way to help make sure this kind of disaster does not occur--if it is possible to do that-- with engineering changes or other mitigation efforts, particularly in the Richmond area which was so seriously devastated and damaged recently by flooding. We think the Senator has a good suggestion and we are willing to recommend the Senate adopt this amendment on a voice vote.

Mr. COCHRAN. I am happy to do that.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I have been advised that the other side wants to look at the amendment. I am happy for anyone who wants to look at the amendment to look at it. It was very coherently explained by the Senator from Virginia. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COCHRAN. There are Senators who have indicated an intention to offer other amendments. We are reviewing some at this time. We hope to be able to accept some of these amendments. We appreciate the cooperation of all Senators today. We have made excellent progress on the bill. We have taken up a number of amendments and voted on them and we hope to be able to complete action on this bill on Tuesday evening. We hope it is not late Tuesday evening. So we are making every effort to organize our effort and encourage those who do have amendments to please let the committee know about the amendments. We have an identified list that is in order, and for those who intend to offer amendments, the sooner they can get us copies of those amendments, the sooner we may be able to let them know whether we can accept them or suggest modifications that could be acceptable. We would like to cooperate with all Senators in moving the bill along with dispatch. We do not see any need to delay the Senate and to cause us to be in late tonight or tomorrow. We know some Senators have plans for travel and we are hoping we can take up another amendment or two tonight and then be able to work on other parts of the bill tomorrow as well. I thank my colleagues for their cooperation with the committee. I understand the Senator from Iowa is on the floor, and I yield the floor.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, as I understand the amendment proposed by the distinguished Senator from Iowa, it would change the percentage by which mitigation funds are calculated to be due from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The Disaster Relief Fund, which we replenished with a supplemental appropriations bill just yesterday with the approval of $2 billion of new money, is an example of the stress that has been placed on this fund because of recent disasters in Florida and elsewhere. To refresh the memory of Senators, the program involves a disaster relief and mitigation funding program. The Disaster Relief Fund provides individual assistance to those who have been displaced from their homes in disasters. It helps pay for food, shelter, and other emergency needs. FEMA--the Federal Emergency Management Agency--administers this program after a disaster. As I understand, approval of the amendment would increase the funds FEMA has to pay out of the Disaster Assistance Fund. I am, frankly, not clear in my own mind exactly how this works, but I am advised this is going to have the net effect of more than doubling the Federal obligation in disaster assistance. Every State that is declared by the President to be eligible for disaster assistance has its damages assessed and becomes eligible for mitigation money. I am told the fund that pays for mitigation benefits is like buying out homes which are in flood-prone areas or building retaining walls to help in the event of the next disaster. These are important efforts to undertake so future disasters will not result in the same kind of damage and will be mitigated or lessened, reduced. The Federal Emergency Management Agency calculates that 7\1/2\ percent over and above the amount of Federal disaster assistance it has provided and gives that money to States. In the past 2 years and in this year's Homeland Security appropriations bill, there is another form of mitigation funding which is available to States called the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Fund administered by FEMA, to which States can submit competitive applications to receive mitigation funding before a disaster strikes. Any State, regardless of it having been designated a Presidential disaster, can submit a request and have it judged on its merits. We have attempted to balance the various kinds of disaster assistance available to victims and available to States in this bill. We support the President's effort to offer assistance to communities before and after disaster strikes. It allows communities to raise risk awareness to help reduce the Nation's disaster losses through better mitigation planning, and the implementation of plan and cost-effective measures. We think at this point it is not the responsible course of action to double the formula and increase the amount States are going to be permitted and can claim from FEMA and not increasing the amount of money that is available to FEMA to pay out the money. This is language change. It is actually bill language. It is authorizing language on an appropriations bill. It doesn't belong on this bill. It should be considered first by the Environment and Public Works Committee, the committee that has legislative jurisdiction of these programs. I understand that committee has a bill that has been sent over to the House that deals with this issue. We should await the advice and counsel and action of the authorizing committee before we act on this proposal. Because of those reasons, I urge the Senate to reject this amendment. I think it is clearly authorizing language, and it will be my intention--I don't want to cut off the right of any Senator to speak-- to move to table the Harkin amendment and ask for the yeas and nays. But I will refrain from doing so until I am assured that Senators who want to speak on the amendment have a right to do so.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the full committee, my friend from Alaska, Senator Stevens, for his kind comments about managing this bill. I appreciate his urging also that this bill be completed on Tuesday. We think that can be done. We think with the cooperation of the Senate it will be done. I am now advised the amendment of the Senator from Iowa does contain general legislation, and because of that a point of order might be sustained under rule XVI. Therefore, I raise a point of order under rule XVI that the amendment constitutes general legislation on an appropriations measure and is not in order.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I understand we may have an amendment to be offered by the Senator from Iowa at this time.

Mr. COCHRAN. I think that is the understanding.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that we return to the Boxer amendment.

Mr. COCHRAN

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period for morning business for debate only, with Senators speaking for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.