Bill Frist

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 1270, which was received from the House.

Mr. FRIST

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

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 89 which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent the resolution and preamble be agreed to en bloc, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and any statements be printed in the Record, without intervening action or debate.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 88, submitted earlier today by Senators Akaka, Sarbanes, Cochran, Baucus, and others.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the Frist amendment be agreed to, the preamble, as amended, be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid on the table.

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent the Judiciary Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 43, and the Senate then proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that not withstanding the recess, committees be allowed to file legislative and executive items on Wednesday, March 30, between the hours of 10 a.m. and 12 noon.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the upcoming recess or adjournment of the Senate, the President of the Senate, the President pro tempore, and the majority and minority leaders be authorized to make appointments to commissions, committees, boards conferences, or other interparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by concurrent action of the two Houses, or by order of the Senate.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I now ask for a second reading and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I understand there is a bill at the desk. I ask for its first reading.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate immediately proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations on today's Executive Calendar: Calendar Nos. 27, 28, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, and 54, and all nominations on the Secretary's desk. Further, that Harold Damelin, PN87, be discharged from the Governmental Affairs Committee, and the Senate also proceed to its consideration. I further ask unanimous consent that the nominations be confirmed en bloc, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then return to legislative session.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, there will be opportunities later when we address the bill for people who feel passionately about it to speak. We are on the budget resolution. People know we are working in a bipartisan way to resolve this matter to save her life which, at the end of the day, is the goal. I request people not say a lot right now so we can proceed with the budget votes unless there is something new to be said; otherwise, we will have an opportunity later tonight.

Mr. FRIST. Regular order. Mrs. FEINSTEIN addressed the Chair.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Further, that all after the resolving clause be stricken and the text of S. Con. Res. 18 as agreed to be inserted in lieu thereof; further, that the resolution then be agreed to as amended and the Senate insist on its amendment, request a conference with the House, and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate receives H. Con. Res. 95 from the House, the Senate proceed to its consideration.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. I ask unanimous consent that there now be a period for morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. FRIST

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

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, through the Chair, in response to how many days the Record will be open, we will work that out as well during the vote.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I have not had a full discussion with the Democratic leader about a session tomorrow. We can either have a discussion now or during the vote. We will discuss during the vote whether or not we will have a session.

Mr. FRIST. Tuesday would be our first vote, if we vote Tuesday. We would not vote on the first Monday back.

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, through the Chair, we are going to have a busy session when we get back. I would love to continue our discussion. We have a number of issues such as patient safety, and we have a couple of district judges that we need to do. We will see how far we get with welfare reform. We can have a busy 3 weeks.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, this morning we will immediately resume consideration of the budget resolution. We have an order in place from last night which sets aside specific debate times in relation to several amendments this morning. There is no debate time remaining on the resolution beyond this time agreement. Senators, therefore, can expect a lengthy series of votes to begin sometime around 1:30 today. This vote-arama will necessitate continued cooperation from all Members. I cannot stress enough the importance of every Senator staying on the floor or very close by throughout the afternoon and into the evening. This is always a trying and challenging period because of the unusual nature of what happens over the course of the day. But beginning around 1:30, we will start a series of votes that will go on for a while. I encourage my colleagues to work with the managers to use restraint in not offering amendments if they are purely message amendments and are not substantive. It is going to be a challenge to bring everything to closure over the course of today and early into this evening already, so please use restraint in terms of whether to offer amendments. Terri Schiavo I know we want to get started, but I did want to bring to the attention of my colleagues an issue that we do have to act on before we leave. I do so on behalf of a number of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have come up and said: There is an important issue facing the country that we have not addressed in the past and that other systems of government and other branches of government have inadequately addressed, and, therefore, it is time for the U.S. Senate to speak. It centers on the fact that if we don't act or if somebody does not act, a living person who has a level of consciousness, who is self- breathing, will be starved to death in the next 2 weeks--thus the action that is required to be done either later tonight or tomorrow in order to prevent that starvation to death by Terri Schiavo. I first heard about the situation facing Terri Schiavo actually several years ago, but the immediacy of it has played out in the last several days because of this decision that has been made, not by her parents who want to keep her alive, not by her family who wants to keep her alive, but by her husband. From a medical standpoint, I wanted to know a little bit more about the case itself, so I had the opportunity to review the initial tapes that were made, the physical examination on which the case was ultimately based, the fact that she was in a persistent vegetative state, and scores of neurologists had come forward and said that it doesn't look like she is in a persistent vegetative state. It is a strange word, ``vegetative state,'' that connotes all sorts of things to lay people. It is a medical term that means that she is not in a coma. Persistent vegetative state is a specific diagnosis that typically has to be made over a period of multiple examinations, usually multiple days, and some neurologists say should be made over several weeks. The facts of this case are that it was made by a single, or maybe two, but a single examination over a very short period of time. The professionals themselves who have viewed those tapes question that initial diagnosis. The other questions arise: Does she have any hope of being rehabilitated? I talked personally to one of the neurologists who examined her, and he said, absolutely, she can greatly improve, substantially improve if she is given the appropriate rehabilitation. I asked myself, had she expressed her wishes about the end of her life? She had no written directive in terms of what would happen if such an event struck her. Did she have an advanced medical directive? The answer is no. So we have come to the point where on this floor we are going to have to face the question of whether we believe that a conscious woman who is breathing on her own--and yes, she has a severe disability, similar to what cerebral palsy might be. She can't physically feed herself. She can't verbally express her desires at this juncture, but she has no legal direction. The question is, Should we allow her to be starved to death? I mention that because it is an important case. It has to do with the culture of life. I believe this body is going to have to speak on this particular matter before we leave for recess. I yield the floor. Amendment No. 204

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, on the floor right now we have the Republican leader, the Democratic leader, and the managers of the bill. What we have said is absolutely critical. We have the opportunity--but it is going to be very difficult and challenging to do--to complete this bill at a reasonable hour tomorrow night. But it is going to take the absolute discipline and cooperation of our colleagues. Right now what that means is the next vote is going to be a 15-minute vote, but thereafter in this series of votes they will be 10 minutes, and we will be cutting the votes off. Therefore, stay in the Chamber. With that, we are going to be able to finish this bill at a reasonable time tomorrow night. Each time--even after 25 minutes we have been cutting off the votes--people complain, saying: You shouldn't be cutting off the votes. The message being sent from the leadership of both sides of the aisle and the managers is: We are going to adhere strictly to these time limits.

Mr. FRIST

Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I am pleased to announce that my Senate colleagues and I will be introducing the ``Support Our Scouts Act of 2005'' today. This legislation will ensure that the Defense Department can and will continue to provide the Scouts the type of support it has provided in the past, such as at Jamborees and on bases. This bill also ensures Scouts have equal access to public facilities, forums, and programs that are open to a variety of other youth or community organizations. Why am I introducing this legislation? Since the Supreme Court decided Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, Boy Scouts of America's relationship with government at all levels has been the target of multiple lawsuits. The Federal Government is defending a lawsuit brought by the ACLU aimed at severing ties between Boy Scouts and the Department of Defense and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The effect of these attempts at exclusion at the Federal, State, and local levels are far-reaching and has had a discernible ``chilling'' effect on government support for our Scouts. This is the greatest legal challenge facing Boy Scouts today. Boy Scouts of America, like other non-profit youth organizations, depend, on its ability to use public facilities and participate in these programs and forums. The Support Our Scouts Act of 2005 addresses these issues by removing any doubt that Federal agencies may welcome Scouts to hold meetings and go camping on Federal property. The Boy Scouts of America is a congressionally chartered organization. Pentagon support for Scouts is authorized in U.S. law. It serves a patriotic, charitable, and educational purpose. Since 1910, Boy Scout membership has totaled more than 110 million young Americans. Today, more than 3.2 million youths and 1.2 million adults are members of the Boy Scouts and are dedicated to fulfilling the Boy Scouts' mission. That number includes more than 40 members of the United States Senate and more than 150 members of the House of Representatives who have been involved in Scouting. I was a Boy Scout, and all three of my sons were as well. This unique American institution is committed to preparing our youth for the future by instilling in them values such as honesty, integrity, and character. Through exposure to the outdoors, hard work, and the virtues of civic duty, the Boy Scouts have developed millions of Americans into superb citizens and future leaders. The Support Our Scouts Act ratifies our longstanding commitment to this valued civic organization. It clarifies that no Federal law, including any rule, regulation, directive, instruction, or order, shall be construed to limit any Federal agency from providing any form of support to the Boy Scouts of America or the Girl Scouts of the United States of America or any organization chartered by the Boy Scouts of America or the Girl Scouts of the United States of America. Activities supported include holding meetings, jamborees, camporees, or other scouting activities on Federal property, or hosting or sponsoring any official event of such organization. The Scouts Act is also being introduced by a bipartisan group of Members in the House. I believe this bill will receive broad, bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress and that we will pass it this year. It is common sense legislation that all fair and reasonable people can support. I encourage Scout supporters--indeed, all Americans--to contact their Senators and Representatives and ask them to support the ``Support Our Scouts Act of 2005.'' I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.