Paul Sarbanes

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. I thank the Senator from Delaware. I strongly commend the Senator from Michigan for how carefully thought-out and reasoned and constructive his amendment is, as was just reflected in the exchange which he had with the Senator from Connecticut. Obviously, this amendment, which is before us and which I support, has been very carefully thought through to deal with all these eventualities. I commend the Senator from Michigan for it.

Mr. SARBANES. It is worth engaging in this discussion just to underscore the sweep of authority that is being provided. Again, I thank my colleague for his leadership on this issue and especially commend him for what I thought was a very thoughtful and powerful article. I encourage people across the country to read this article. It is a very succinct, analytical, and perceptive statement of the issues that are at stake.

Mr. SARBANES

Mr. SARBANES. But that does not give the Senator the floor.

Mr. SARBANES. If the Senator will yield, does each leader get 15 minutes?

Mr. SARBANES. Can I inquire who follows Senator Frist?

Mr. SARBANES. That does not strike me as going back and forth.

Mr. SARBANES. Is this all being done through unanimous consent requests?

Mr. SARBANES. For what?

Mr. SARBANES. I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak after the senior Senator from Michigan.

Mr. SARBANES. I am happy to yield to the Senator from Virginia for a comment or an observation he wants to make, but I do not yield the floor.

Mr. SARBANES. Upon the disposition of the second Byrd amendment, which would be after cloture--

Mr. SARBANES. Why don't we give Senator Byrd 15 minutes?

Mr. SARBANES. Now, as I understand it, we are facing the prospect of, in effect, terminating all debate, precluding a lot of potential amendments, and ending this matter in about one week's time, a matter of this grave import. I ask the Senator if that is correct.

Mr. SARBANES. The distinguished Senator from Virginia, I have been watching him. He is marshaling the war forces on the floor of the Senate.

Mr. SARBANES. I make this observation to my colleague. It seems to me it is a sad commentary.

Mr. SARBANES. How about the Levin amendment?

Mr. SARBANES. Neither of which involved the prospect of going to war.

Mr. SARBANES. I see as part of that process, any time anyone speaks, he wants to make an observation. I would be happy to hear it so I get an opportunity to respond.

Mr. SARBANES. October 4, and today is October 9. October 4, I am told by the Chair. Today is October the 9th, on a resolution that may take the Nation into war.

Mr. SARBANES. The distinguished Senator, I think I am correct in recalling, was the leader of the Senate at the time we did the Panama Canal treaties.

Mr. SARBANES. Did the Senator recall there were two treaties, the neutrality treaty and the canal treaty itself? We went to the neutrality treaty. Floor debate began on February 6 of 1978. We voted on March 16 of 1978. So we had a period from February the 6th until March 16 to consider that treaty. We then went to the Panama Canal treaty. We began debate on March 17 of 1978 and we voted on that treaty on April 18 of 1978. In other words, roughly 6 weeks on one treaty and a month on the other treaty.

Mr. SARBANES. Parliamentary inquiry. When did the Senate proceed to this resolution?

Mr. SARBANES. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. SARBANES. Will the Senator yield for a question.

Mr. SARBANES. Mr. President, can I inquire what the parliamentary situation is?