Motion to Proceed, Sens. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) and Tom Daschle (D-South Dakota), May 18, 2000

Motion to Proceed, Sens. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) and Tom Daschle (D-South Dakota), May 18, 2000
[Page: S4170]
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to proceed to S. 2522, the foreign ops appropriations bill.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, under that debate time, I would say again that I believe Senator Gorton wishes to make a statement at this time. I see Senator McConnell is here, and I presume Senator Leahy, who is also here, may want to talk about the content of this legislation and discuss how we are going to find a way to get it completed.

I know we have a problem in that the House has not acted on this legislation. But we also need to go ahead and move forward on it. It has emergency funding in it for the counternarcotics program in Colombia. It has the Israeli peace process funds in it and debt relief dealing with Iraqi opposition, and a lot of other very important items.

I think we need to discuss that and decide how we are going to be able to proceed in an emergency way on this legislation.

Having said that, while that debate is taking place, we will be working to see if we can work out an agreement on the next bill that will be called up relatively shortly.

I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Democrat leader.

[Page: S4171]
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I objected, as I noted I would do yesterday, to taking up a bill that has yet to be acted upon in the House. The regular order is the bill must be approved in the House prior to the time we finish our work on the legislation. I see no need to deal with the same bill twice, to deal with it now and to deal with it again later once the bill is acted upon in the House of Representatives.

The distinguished majority leader had noted that there is emergency funding incorporated in this bill. I am sympathetic to that. I won't ask him at this point, but I note I could ask unanimous consent--which I will not do--to take up H.R. 3908, the emergency supplemental bill for the year 2000. The House passed it and urged the Senate to take it up and pass it. The Appropriations Committee had hoped they could take it up and pass it. It was the majority leader's determination not to take it up, not to pass it, but to leave it in committee. I am not as sympathetic as I wish I could be about his desire to deal with these emergency matters when we could easily and quickly and very efficiently deal with emergency funding by simply taking up the bill that is right now on the calendar. Again, that is H.R. 3908.

That is, of course, the right of the majority and the right of the majority leader, especially, to make that decision. I am disappointed. Until that House bill comes before the Senate, it is not my intention to have to require the Senate to go through a debate on the same issue twice. That was the reason the rules were written as they were. Constitutionally, appropriations bills must begin in the House of Representatives. We are, in a sense, circumventing the rules of the Congress by allowing these bills to be debated and considered prior to the time the bill comes before the Senate.

We will certainly object. We will look forward to the House acting, as we hope they will soon, and not only on this bill but on others. Senator Lott is absolutely right. This legislation should have been reported out it should have been passed in the House by now. It hasn't been. It is disappointing that it hasn't been. That is the only reason we are not taking it up this afternoon.

I yield the floor.

As of May 19, 2000, this document was also available online at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?r106:S18MY0-332: