Gordon Smith

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today, I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred August 8, 2000 in Providence, Rhode Island. Two young men said they were severely beaten and kicked by two strangers. The two victims were walking down a street when a car slowed and passed them. Minutes later the car drove by again, and the occupants began shouting vulgarities, anti-gay slurs and said, ``We're going to kill you.'' The victims yelled back; the perpetrators allegedly got out of the car, shouted more anti-gay slurs and vulgarities, threw a beer can at them and then proceeded to beat and punch the victims in the head and body until one of them almost lost consciousness. The perpetrators eventually got in their car and fled, and witnesses called for help. I believe that Government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today, Mr. President, I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred June 10, 2000 in Albuquerque, New Mexico. A man in a minivan yelling obscenities ran down participants in a gay pride parade. One victim was hit twice in the knees and thrown off the hood. The perpetrator tried to swerve into the crowd, which included small children, three times before police pulled him out of the vehicle and arrested him. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens--to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today, Mr. President, I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred February 6, 2000 in Tucson, Arizona. A 20-year-old gay University of Arizona student was sitting at a cafe when a man came up behind him and stabbed him with large knife. Witnesses heard the perpetrator saying that he had ``killed a f---ing faggot,'' ``this is what gays deserve,'' and ``let this be a warning to the gay community.'' The victim was treated at a local hospital and released. The attack spurred an anti-hate rally on campus a few days later drawing over 1,000 people. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defnd them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today, I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred August 24, 2000 in Allentown, PA. A 24-year-old fatally shot a 15-year-old youth attending a party in his home after the teen touched him on the arm and other partygoers suggested the teen was gay. According to the Allentown Morning Call, a witness said that the alleged perpetrator, Michael Gambler, retrieved a shotgun and shot Kevin Kleppinger in the forehead. Friends say that Kleppinger was not gay and had been rubbing the perpetrator's arm because he thought he had accidentally spit on it. Other teens in the apartment began teasing the victim that he might be gay before the perpetrator shot him. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. We believe that expanding health insurance to millions of hard working low-income Americans will relieve the uncertainty and fear many people face, knowing that they are one illness away from losing their life savings or their home. It is the right thing to do. It is the right time to do it. As the editorial in the Washington Post says: What about a timeout to pay a little heed to those who can't afford to get sick? I thank my colleagues on the budget conference committee for preserving this critical line item for the uninsured. I urge all my colleagues to vote for it when it comes out of this conference and then later when it is crafted into final form by the Finance Committee. I yield the floor.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 1 more minute.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. The Washington Post editorial states: House conferees have been fighting with their Senate counterparts to reduce the spending levels in the congressional budget resolution. No doubt some cuts can be made in the Senate totals without the country's suffering harm. But at least one relatively minor Senate proposal deserves to remain. They are referring to this $28 billion that we can use to reduce the ranks of the uninsured. Currently that is about 17 percent of our fellow citizens, over 43 million Americans. Senator Wyden and I, when we came up with this idea, hoped we could cut this number in half. It is now up to the Finance Committee to achieve that. They have the money now authorized to accomplish that. Good programs do exist for providing health care to the uninsured. Medicaid, as we all know, is working. It needs more resources. There is also the Children's Health Insurance Program, or CHIP, which has also reduced the number of uninsured children in this country. One of the things I was most grateful to have been a part of when I first came to the Senate was a compromise between Senator Hatch and Senator Kennedy for the CHIP program, which became the pivot point for the balanced budget agreement. Oregon's Children's Health Insurance Assistance Program has enrolled 13,000 children in our State. But there are more than 61,000 eligible children without coverage because of the limited amount of money budgeted for this purpose. Senator Wyden and I hope the Finance Committee will expand this program to include their parents. What we are doing is providing access to health care for low-income Americans. This is the No. 1 bipartisan agenda item we have. We have started on that plan and will build on its past successes. I believe expanding coverage can be done in a way that will promote State flexibility, avoid new bureaucracies, and protect the employer- based coverage system, while providing a meaningful, affordable benefit to millions of Americans. Our first component that we will propose to the Finance Committee will be to give businesses incentives to make quality health insurance more affordable for their low-income workers. Our plan will give businesses a tax credit if they chip in more to offer quality health care to their low-income employees. Many low-wage employees are working hard but are having trouble paying the full amount for health insurance. Second, our plan will extend Medicaid coverage to more low-income Americans. Many low-income adults who cannot afford or are not offered health insurance will be eligible for Medicaid coverage. As I indicated, we want to expand the CHIP program.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Madam President, I have come to this Chamber in the past to express my frustration when things have not seemed to be proceeding and we seemed to have been stuck in gridlock. Today is a very real exception to that feeling. I rejoice that we have a budget agreement, and that we are working on education reform that puts serious resources behind serious reform in our educational system. I am here as well to thank the leaders of the conference committee on the Budget, specifically Senator Domenici and Senator Lott on our side, and others in the House and Senate who have, I am told, preserved the one thing I wanted most in this budget, which was a $28 billion authorization for 3 years to expand health care to the uninsured. I came to this issue not this year, but from the first year I entered public life as an Oregon State senator and won membership on our health care committee. I was not around when we created the Oregon Health Plan, but I did play a role in obtaining funding for it. The Oregon's Medicaid program, known as the Oregon Health Plan, has dramatically reduced the number of the working uninsured in the State of Oregon. We have a tradition in our State of trying to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. I express gratitude to my colleagues on the Democrat and Republican side for this budget agreement that will help our State and others do just that. I believe we need tax reduction and tax reform. I think we are going to do something very significant in our generation with what we will likely adopt very soon in this body and the other, and that President Bush will sign. It will put real dollars into the pockets of working Americans. But I must say how grateful I am that this budget item has been preserved--$28 billion for the uninsured--because while we cut taxes for Americans, it is also appropriate that we care for those who cannot care for themselves. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent an editorial from the Washington Post of this morning entitled ``Timeout for the Uninsured'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Madam President, I was not here when the order came for my 5 minutes in a unanimous consent agreement. I ask unanimous consent I be allowed 5 minutes now, and any time I get be added to the Democratic side. I will be very brief.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred June 1, 2000, in Baltimore, MD. Gary William Mick, 25, pleaded guilty to first- degree murder, attempted murder, and armed robbery after admitting that he murdered a gay man and tried to kill another because, he told police, he thought gay men were ``evil.'' In the first attack, a New Jersey man was bludgeoned to death with a claw hammer at the Admiral Fell Inn in Fells Point. Mick met his second victim, a dentist, at a bar, had dinner with him and went home with him. He later attacked him with a knife. The men struggled and the victim escaped. The perpetrator told police that a childhood incident caused him to hate homosexuals. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I gave my speech because of the question of the Senator from Texas. I thank her for that opportunity.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, we do have testing. I do not think it is on the scale that we are contemplating in this bill. What I hear, as I travel the State of Oregon, over and over again from parents is: We would like to give more resources to education. We would like more accountability for that. We would like better results for that. I commend the Senator from Texas and others on the committee, Senator Collins, and our friends on the Democratic side who are focusing on some very significant reforms in this bill. If I can cut through the arguments I am hearing, as I have listened and presided today, often we tend to confuse what we are about, whether we are about developing a system of employment for adults or whether we are about developing a system for educating children. If we can keep the focus on educating children, there are all kinds of things that become possible in terms of testing, not just kids but teachers as well, to make sure we are delivering results, that we are giving parents more choices so we give their children more chances. In a nutshell, that is what I want to vote for: more resources but also more reform. If we do that, the American people will look at our work as Republicans and Democrats and thank us for generations to come. There is not a single thing we could do more significantly for the future of our country, for the parents and their children, than to provide more resources and to demand more reform. We keep our stewardship then.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today, Mr. President, I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred July 29, 2000 in Mahwah, New Jersey. A man who allegedly attacked two men after calling them gay was arrested and charged with aggravated assault, bias harassment, and bias assault. Witnesses told police that the alleged perpetrator, William Courain, 26, was at an apartment complex party when he began making remarks to several of the guests about their sexual preferences. He left the party and confronted two men in the parking lot, making obscene comments about their sexual orientation, before attacking them. Witnesses say he began punching and kicking the two victims, one of whom suffered bleeding from the mouth and eyes and was treated at a local hospital. (The Record, August 1, 2000) I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today, I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred July 4, 2000 in Grant Town, WV. Arthur ``J.R.'' Carl Warren Jr., 26, an openly gay African American man, was brutally murdered. Warren, whose body was found on the edge of his hometown, was allegedly killed by two 17-year- old boys. Known to call Warren names considered racial epithets and anti-gay slurs, the boys allegedly beat him and repeatedly kicked him with steel-toed boots. They threw him in a car and drove across town, ignoring his pleas to be taken home, which they passed on the way to the gravel pullout where they savagely kicked him and then ultimately killed him by driving back and forth over him. Neither current federal law nor West Virginia's hate crimes law include sexual orientation. Mr. President, I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens--to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. Today, I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred on November 6, 1998 in Seattle, Washington. A gay man was severely beaten with rocks and broken bottles in his neighborhood by a gang of youths shouting ``faggot.'' The victim sustained a broken nose and swollen jaw. When he reported the incident to police two days later, the officer refused to take the report. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens--to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about hate crimes legislation I introduced with Senator Kennedy last month. The Local Law Enforcement Act of 2001 would add new categories to current hate crimes legislation sending a signal that violence of any kind is unacceptable in our society. I would like to detail a heinous crime that occurred in my own home State of Oregon in 1995. A twenty-seven year old Stockton, California man murdered a Medford, OR couple, Roxanne Ellis, 53 and Michelle Abdill, 42. The women, who ran a property management business, disappeared December 4, 1995 after showing the man an apartment for rent. He shot them both in the head, and the bodies were left bound and gagged in a truck bed. The Stockton man later confessed, saying he targeted the women because they were lesbians, and he figured they wouldn't have families that would miss them. I believe that government's first duty is to defend its citizens, to defend them against the harms that come out of hate. The Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act of 2001 is now a symbol that can become substance. I believe that by passing this legislation, we can change hearts and minds as well.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I want to thank the distinguished Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee for helping to reach this agreement to adopt this amendment today. While this modified version does not contain the $2.7 billion in fiscal year 2003 that the original did, it does call for the $1.3 billion increase in fiscal year 2002 for agriculture conservation under function 300 of the budget. This amount, combined with $350 million authorized under an amendment adopted yesterday, totals more than $1.6 billion for conservation activities in fiscal year 2002. As our farmers and ranchers are faced with new environmental regulations and development pressures, agriculture conservation programs become even more important. Right now, demand for conservation assistance far outstrips available funding for such programs as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program. In addition, there is a need for more NRCS technical assistance support and a new incentives-based conservation initiative such as the Conservation Security Act. I want to thank Senators Harkin, Leahy, Snowe, Crapo, Boxer, Wyden, Dayton, Bingaman, Levin, Durbin, Johnson, and Landrieu who joined me in introducing this bipartisan amendment. I have enjoyed working with them and believe that we have a growing core of interest in agriculture conservation funding here in the Senate. I look forward to working closely with my friends on both sides of the aisle to pursue this funding in the upcoming conference on the budget as well as in future agriculture appropriations acts.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2002. This amendment would increase the construction funds available to the Bureau of Reclamation by $100 million annually in fiscal years 2002 and 2003. Mr. President, there is a crying need for water infrastructure in the Western United States. Many existing Reclamation projects are over 40 years old and need improvements and rehabilitation. A new environmental ethic has caused projects to provide more water for the environment, or to be reconfigured to be more environmentally friendly. These types of construction projects include screening diversions, lining canals, and temperature control devices. The 106th Congress authorized several new projects to be funded by the Bureau of Reclamation, including the Lewis and Clark Water Supply Project in South Dakota, and a reconfigured Dakota Water Supply Project for North Dakota. The views and estimates of the Senate Energy Committee also anticipated Committee action on a major Indian water settlement in Arizona, and the enactment of a CAL-FED authorizations bill. In the face of these existing and anticipated demands on the Reclamation budget, construction funds available to the agency declined thirty-six percent over the last ten years. This bipartisan amendment would provide $100 million in additional construction funds for the Bureau of Reclamation in both 2002 and 2003. In 2002, the funds come from the function 920 account. In 2003, they come from the budget surplus. As the National Urban Agricultural Council aptly stated: ``It is time to turn the corner on the funding for the Bureau and put it on a course so that the West is not left withering in the desert.'' I urge my colleagues' support of this amendment.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, the Senate has just completed a long week debating a budget that I believe will help the American people in many ways, and I am proud of that work. But there are thousands of people in southern Oregon who are today getting some very bad news: the water on which the future of their farms and families depend will not be delivered this year. As I speak, my state is currently experiencing its worst drought in seventy-seven years. And while the lack of irrigation water is not completely the fault of the federal government, the situation has been exacerbated by the actions of federal agencies, primarily the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, that have authority over the quantity of water provided to the farmers and ranchers of the Klamath Basin. In the midst of this natural disaster, these two agencies have issued new requirements that increase lake levels in the Upper Klamath Lake as well as streamflows down the Klamath River. These edicts were issued in spite of admissions by Bureau of Reclamation officials that the proposed water levels are not attainable this year, even if there are no agricultural deliveries. For eight years, the Clinton Administration waged war on hard-working people who depend on natural resources to sustain their families and their communities. Sharp reductions in timber sales and the growth of onerous regulations has already weakened the economy of the Klamath Basin. Now, without irrigation water the economy stands to lose almost $144 million. This cannot be allowed to happen. When President Bush was elected, the people of Southern Oregon breathed a collective sigh of relief, believing that help was on the way. And although this decision was set in motion by the prior administration, my constituents cannot help but wonder if better days are yet to come. Unfortunately, one thing they do know for sure is that worse times are coming this year. I do not doubt the President's dedication to farmers, ranchers, and others in the wide rural expanses throughout this land. But I do understand that many of the people in the Klamath Basin cannot help but question this administration's commitment to their needs. While I appreciate the intermediate assistance the administration has offered, I have to again ask the President to reexamine the draconian orders that have turned a difficult drought into a crisis of immense proportions. In the meantime, I promise the people of the Klamath Basin that I will continue to fight for their needs and for the needs of their families until this dire mistake is rectified.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to offer an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2002. This amendment will increase the amount available to fully fund the sewer overflow control grants program at a level of $750 million for FY2002. It is important that Congress makes this level of commitment to clean water for a number of reasons. The condition of our nation's wastewater collection and treatment facilities is alarming. In its 1996 ``Clean Water Needs Survey,'' the EPA estimates that nearly $140 billion will be needed over the next 20 years to address wastewater infrastructure problems in our communities. In March 1999, the EPA revised its figures, infrastructure needs are now estimated at $200 billion. Other independent studies indicate that EPA has undershot the mark, estimating that these unmet needs exceed $300 billion over 20 years. In my state of Oregon, the challenge of municipal water treatment is ever-present. Roughly seventy percent of Oregon's population lives in the Willamette River watershed, with that number continuing to grow. The increasing demand on water supply and treatment is made even more acute by the responsibility to protect endangered salmon and steelhead in the Willamette River. Add to that the extremely low water and poor snowpack conditions facing the Northwest this year, and the urgency of maintaining high water quality in the river is greatly intensified. The city of Portland is Oregon's largest, and its proximity to the Willamette River has been a contributor to water quality problems. At its worst, Portland's combined sewage overflow system dumped an estimated 10 billion gallons of combined sewage annually into the river in years past. During the past 7 years, however, Portland has invested over $300 million in clean water infrastructure, and will spend another $300 million in the next 5 years to meet its obligations under the Clean Water Act. I am working closely with the City of Portland to infuse targeted federal funds into its unique efforts to meet rigorous environmental requirements and responsibilities. I am sponsoring this amendment because I strongly believe that Congress must make a firm commitment to helping cities like Portland, OR that are fully engaged in updating and improving their water treatment programs. The effects of such a commitment will be manifold, particularly upon a river like the Willamette that is long treasured, but heavily used by the many that derive their lives and livelihood from it.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Parliamentary inquiry: It is part of the unanimous consent agreement that Senator Wyden and I have 15 minutes equally divided?

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I have an amendment I send to the desk. It is an amendment proposed by myself, my colleague Senator Wyden, Senator Baucus, Senator Kennedy, Senator Snowe, and Senator Santorum.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, when I go home to Oregon I am often asked what is the biggest surprise I have had as a Senator. I often and without any hesitation answer that my biggest surprise is that one of my closest friendships in the Senate, and one of the most constructive relationships I have in the Senate, is with my former opponent, the senior Senator from Oregon, Ron Wyden. After I was elected to replace Mark Hatfield, he and I became more than colleagues; we became friends, confidants, and worked every year to try to establish an agenda that helps and serves the interests of our State as well as our country. This year we have followed that tradition, announced a bipartisan agenda, toured our State with seven joint townhalls, and tried to listen to the people as to what they wanted. We heard many things. We heard, ``Tax cuts.'' I am for President Bush's tax cut. I make no apology for that. I believe our economy needs that. I believe our country needs help. I believe we need to be reminded that we are a democratic free enterprise society and not a democratic socialist society. But having said that, I believe, using the surpluses we are bountifully blessed with, there are things we can and should do. In Oregon, we have a proud tradition of caring for the underprivileged and the uninsured. I was a State senator when we set about funding the Oregon Health Plan. We accomplished that, but the job is not done in helping the uninsured. It seems to me appropriate that in a time when we are looking to cut substantial taxes from the paychecks of the American people that we should take time to help those who also work but who do not enjoy some of the basics of American living, which is health care. There are 170 million Americans who enjoy the best health care in the world. They are Americans. But of our American citizens, there are 43 million who have no health insurance. Many of those folks are working Americans as well. But Senator Wyden and I propose, along with the bipartisan coalition, to provide in this budget $28 billion over 3 years to further narrow that gap of the uninsured. Our plan will build on past actions to give 15 million to 20 million of these uninsured Americans access to affordable quality health insurance without creating huge new Government programs. First, our plan will give businesses incentives to make quality health insurance more affordable to their low-income workers. Our plan will give businesses a tax credit if they chip in more to offer quality health care to their low-income employees. Many low-wage employees are working hard, but we are having trouble paying the full amount for health insurance. Second, our plan will extend Medicaid coverage to more low-income Americans. Many low-income adults who cannot afford or are not offered private health insurance would now be eligible under this proposal for Medicaid coverage. Finally, we will give the State the option to extend the highly successful CHIP program, or the SCHIP program, the State Children's Health Insurance Program. We will work to extend these benefits to the parents of these children. We are trying to say in this great society that we can narrow this uninsured gap. I believe if we can't do it now, we will never be able to do it. Senator Wyden and I are bringing together an extraordinary coalition between liberals and conservatives. I am referring to the Families U.S.A., which is a group of folks who are trying to advance the cause of the uninsured. Also, the Health Insurance Association of America, a very conservative group, has come together behind what Senator Wyden and I are trying to give voice to. I appreciate the chance to offer this amendment. I urge its adoption and, if not by unanimous consent, that it be overwhelmingly approved. I believe it will be a very nice component of President Bush's effort to extend some passion and conservatism to the American people. I yield the remainder of my time to my colleague, Senator Wyden.

Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, it is my understanding that this may be agreed to unanimously. But in the event it is not, I ask for the yeas and nays.