Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, before I put forth the unanimous-consent request one more time, we did add the Byrd resolution or amendment to the process list of amendments, and I renew my unanimous-consent request.

Mr. LOTT. In answer to the Senator, I say there was no time agreement worked out, partially because the Senators didn't want that time agreement. I am hoping they will be actually relatively short in time. I know Senator Nickles doesn't need a lot of time. I believe these amendments will go relatively quickly, and there will be time left for other Members to address the Senate on their amendments. And then after that, when all time has expired, Senators can still talk in morning business for up to 10 minutes. We did not get a time agreement in our effort to get the UC worked out, but I think we are talking about a relatively short period time of time.

Mr. LOTT. I believe that is the way they do them.

Mr. LOTT. The UC specifically says ``other than agreed upon amendments to be offered by the managers.''

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I can respond again, I share a lot of the Senator's feelings. We will work to see if there is some way we can get an agreement on these process amendments to limit the number or to find another time and opportunity for them to be offered. I remind you that yesterday, one unanimous consent agreement that we worked out took nine amendments off the board in one swoop, and we agreed to something that was passed by voice vote. I am not sure we can do that here. Part of what we need is a little time to work with what we have left.

Mr. LOTT. We have discussed that back and forth. We tried to again, in a bipartisan way, figure the best way to deal with this, the fairest way, and also the way that would hopefully not lead to the largest number of amendments. We really think that we may actually wind up having fewer amendments finally voted on tomorrow by doing it this way. We tried it the other way. Bear with us as we try it this way. Again I urge, unless you just really feel you have to have a vote on your amendment tomorrow I urge you, and I will be saying it on this side--but but if you feel strongly, you can talk about it tonight and offer your amendment tomorrow.

Mr. LOTT. I have not had a chance to get into the specifics of each one of these amendments, but I hope we could pursue the possibility of not going through the long list of process amendments. At least half of these are on our side of the aisle. So I hope we could find another time, another day, another way to do these process amendments. I will certainly be working on that later on tonight and in the morning. Since we have the first 3 votes already lined up that would give us time to do some work on exactly whether or not this is essential. I will work with Senator Daschle on that.

Mr. LOTT. Not at all. It would not preclude other Senators from offering amendments. I want to say to the Senator--

Mr. LOTT. Yes, 9 o'clock, so we will start earlier and we will start voting--we would have the brief explanation and we would start voting immediately after that. We would then vote one after the other until we completed the process.

Mr. LOTT. It's Allard-Brownback. OK. We got that.

Mr. LOTT. I agree and I appreciate the Senator's comment on that. I have been thinking that for several years. I remember one day here we had, what, 39 votes and set a record, a historical record Senator Byrd told us. It is just not a good process. We are committed to coming up, by September 8, within the next couple of months, with a way to change the process. In fact, Senator Byrd has some good ideas. But I just want to make sure that we have thought it through and we don't start and change it without thinking about unintended consequences. I don't believe anybody intended 10 years ago, when reconciliation was set up, that it would lead to this type of voting process. We are committed on both sides, the leadership and our senior Members, to coming up with a better process. We are going to do that. We certainly would like the input of the Senator from Nevada, too.

Mr. LOTT. The Senator's point is well taken and I certainly agree. Senator Daschle and I would hope there would not be a long series of amendments offered tomorrow. Some Senators will feel very strongly and feel like they should have that opportunity. Under the rules as they now exist we could not cut them off. We have had a good debate. We have had the alternative amendment offered by the Democratic leader. We have had other good amendments and debates that occurred. We hope we could bring it to a conclusion at a reasonable time tomorrow. I remind my colleagues we had 16 votes yesterday, I believe it was. We started at 9:30 and we finally concluded that at about 5 o'clock yesterday afternoon. Now I believe we can do a better job. We'll start earlier tomorrow and we will stick to the 10-minute vote after the first vote. And we will try to move it right along. But we found the other night that when we said OK, just leave your amendment with the managers of the bill, when we came in in the morning we had 61 amendments. Then the leadership, Senator Daschle and his whip team, as we were, were running around trying to find out which amendments really--what they do. You know, will the Senator insist on offering it? Can we get them accepted? It really complicated the process. We really believe by this process Senators will be able to debate these amendments and other amendments tonight. Then they, based on their thinking tomorrow, they would have the opportunity or perhaps would choose not to offer the amendments tomorrow. But if they do we cannot--we cannot cut off the Senators' right to offer an amendment.

Mr. LOTT. Our understanding is Senator Byrd is going to offer his separately. Mr. President, I renew my request based on the three-unanimous consent request paragraphs I read, with the addition of the Domenici request.

Mr. LOTT. These are the amendments having to do strictly with process questions. I know there is a lot of interest in these process amendments. I am not familiar with the content of all of them. Several Senators addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Yes. Right.

Mr. LOTT. But, in view of what we have to deal with, I ask unanimous consent, now, that during the remainder of the consideration tonight of S. 949, the following be the only amendments in order, other than agreed-upon amendments to be offered by the managers: The Nickles amendment, the Gramm amendment, and Kerry of Massachusetts amendment. I further ask at the conclusion of the debate on the above listed amendments, it be in order for any Member of the Senate to address the Senate with respect to an amendment that may be offered after all time is expired, but there be no further amendments to be in order this evening. I further ask that at the conclusion of the remainder of the time on S. 949, the Senate automatically proceed to a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each. That way, if all time has expired and you have an amendment that you are going to offer tomorrow, you have that 10 minutes in which you can explain tonight what your intentions are, what is in the amendment; so I ask at the conclusion of the remaining time on S. 949 the Senate automatically proceed to this period of morning business.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I do want to propound a unanimous consent request here, that would allow us to carry out the indication that we have put at the table here that this would be the last vote of the night. Before I do that, I want to say again I really appreciate the bipartisan cooperation that we have had throughout this week. I think it has made the Senate look good and it has taken a lot of work and several of us have had to keep our commitments in a way that was not always easy, but we have stuck by it on both sides of the aisle. I thank the Senators for doing that. I appreciate also your tolerance when I suffered mightily on one of the votes myself today. The chairman and the ranking member have been a pleasure in working through all of this. I thank them and their staff. It is a little premature. I think we are tired, we are trying to find a way to complete our work, but it is important we also take note of the fact that we have been doing some good work working together. We want to keep that going. So we have a unanimous consent request that we have worked with Senator Daschle on. He has made a lot of very positive recommendations. We think this would be the fairest way under the process that we have now to complete our work. I want to say, Senator Daschle and Senator Domenici, Senator Byrd and I have been talking about the fact that we need to take a look at the process and see if we cannot come up with a little better way to do it without the votes in seriatim at the end of this process. Senator Byrd has a resolution he is going to introduce. Senator Daschle and I are going to appoint a task force of senior Senators to see if we cannot come up with some ideas we can agree to, to allow this process to be done better in the future. Unanimous Consent Agreement

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Madam President, I have a unanimous consent request that I have cleared with the Democratic leader.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, also, before I renew my unanimous-consent request, Senator Breaux was also involved in this exercise and was helpful. I express my appreciation to him. I renew my unanimous-consent request.

Mr. LOTT. I yield the floor, Mr. President. Mr. CHAFEE addressed the Chair.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I have been working with Senator Chafee and others, including Senator Jeffords, on a number of amendments that were offered last night as first- or second-degree amendments. I think we have worked out a process, now, that we are all comfortable with. Let me enter this unanimous-consent request and then we will have a brief colloquy also. I ask unanimous consent the following amendments be withdrawn: Chafee amendment No. 448, Chafee amendment No. 500, Chafee amendment No. 501, Lott amendments Nos. 505, 507, 508, 509, Rockefeller amendment No. 510 and the Roth amendment No. 513; I further ask unanimous consent that the Senate turn to the Roth amendment No. 511, and that all between lines 23 on page 22 and line 3 on page 23 be stricken; I further ask the Senate then call up the Chafee amendment No. 512 to the Roth amendment No. 511, as modified, that the Chafee amendment be agreed to, and the Roth amendment, as amended, then be agreed to; I further ask unanimous consent that when the committee amendment to S. 949, the Taxpayer Relief Act, is before the Senate, Senator Roth be recognized to offer an amendment which is the text of the Roth amendment No. 511, as modified and amended, and the text of the Kennedy amendment, No. 492, if adopted by the Senate, to S. 947, to the language regarding the children's health initiative, and the amendment be agreed to; Finally, I ask unanimous consent that it not be in order during the pendency of S. 949 to offer further amendments or motions regarding title XXI of the Social Security Act, except amendments regarding revenues and outlays.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, throughout the day I have been working with Senator Chafee and others with regard to amendments.

Mr. LOTT. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. amendment no. 504

Mr. LOTT. As a matter of fact, Mr. President, if I can respond to the Senator's reservation, I noted when I read through this that there were a series of amendments that had been offered in a variety of ways affecting this particular area: Three by Senator Chafee, four by myself, one by Senator Roth, one by Senator Rockefeller. So this is quite a laboriously worked-out process. The Senator from Vermont, as a matter of fact, is not particularly happy with some provisions still remaining, and he had an amendment that would have tried to change that. A number of others--Senator Nickles of Oklahoma--I believe, had something. But this unanimous- consent agreement was worked out in a way that a number of Senators decided not to go forward with their objections. I personally don't agree with this, but it is the best way that we could work through about six or eight amendments that were pending in a reasonable and fair way, and it certainly will have another day in court.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. I move to reconsider the vote.