The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 2610” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the Senate section on pages S7296-S7297 on June 26, 1998.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 2610
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that we turn to Calendar No. 273, H.R. 2610, the reauthorization of the drug czar office, and immediately following the reporting by the clerk, the chairman be recognized to modify the amendment, the committee substitute; that there be 30 minutes for debate to be equally divided with no amendments or motions in order. I further ask that following the conclusion or yielding back of this time, the Senate proceed to immediate adoption of the committee substitute to be followed immediately by third reading and final passage, all without intervening action or debate. And, finally, I ask unanimous consent it be in order for me to ask for the yeas and nays on passage at this time.
Mr. FORD. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, there are some who had hoped to offer some amendments. They were in the process of trying to work these amendments out where they would be agreeable. That has not transpired yet. So, then, on behalf of this side, I object.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I must object. I object because what the majority leader proposes is to add a very significant piece of substantive drug legislation relating to the crack-powder cocaine sentencing issues.
I note that the Judiciary Committee has not reported this legislation. This legislation is subject to significant debate. For example, the costs of the most recent proposal offered by Senators Abraham and Allard are very significant.
According to the Justice Department--the 5-year cost estimate to our federal prison budget is more than $790 million. The 10-year estimate--
more than $1.9 billion.
This is just one example of the significant policy implications of this proposal. Frankly, the Judiciary Committee must be given the opportunity to report this legislation before we debate this on the floor.
In contrast, we have fully debated the drug director legislation introduced last summer. The Judiciary Committee has debated it, the committee held hearings, the committee developed a bipartisan re-
authorization bill, the committee reported the bill last November, since then we have worked with Senator McCain and the Armed Services Committee to work out their issues with this bill.
The bottom lines--we have a bipartisan, fully debated, bill; and we need to get the drug director's office re-authorized.
There are many particular, specific drug policy issues to debate. Crack-cocaine is just one of them. Youth drug abuse, youth violence, drug interdiction, and many more all need to be debated.
But, let's keep our eye on the ball, and let's re-authorize General McCaffrey's office. The General needs our support.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I should note we had at least one very important amendment that a Senator wanted to offer on this side of the aisle to this bill, too, dealing with the penalties for the use of powder cocaine. Certainly, it is a very important issue, and I would like it to be considered, but I called upon that Senator--actually it was two Senators--and said you will have a chance to offer that on other legislation including State, Justice, Commerce. He was willing, then, to agree to put it aside.
I really think we need to reauthorize the drug czar office. I am hoping this is not the final word on this. Maybe we can work out something in July to consider it. But our problem is, we are really running out of time. I think it is going to be unconscionable if we can't find some way to quickly reauthorize the drug czar's office. We will have to do it without it taking up more than just a couple or 3 hours, because we just don't have the time, when you look at the appropriations bills and everything else we are going to need to do.
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I understand what the majority leader is saying, what he is trying to do. But if he continued to push these amendments over to a piece of legislation at a later time, then you are going to have all these amendments that are waiting, and your colleagues will want to bring them up, and then your colleagues will be asked not to bring it up on that one.
So we go through here with this constrained time that we find ourselves with, and the inability to bring amendments. I understand what the majority leader wants to do. I have no fault with what he is trying to do except we are trying to work out some amendments that we think are important. Just like your side, we are going to let ours try to work them out.
So I will object.
Mr. LOTT. I understand that. I know every individual Senator can demand his or her right to offer amendments. But I would have to say, I am very concerned that the Senate is getting more and more into a position where we try to rewrite or write bills on the floor of the Senate. One of the basic tenets I was told about when I came over to the Senate is, if you have a bad bill, don't think you are going to fix it on the floor of the Senate. When you have something like a drug czar reauthorization--I know there are a lot of drug-related amendments that are sort of pent up and Members want to offer them, but it seems to me we ought to just reauthorize that office--it is not a big, complicated bill--and allow the drug czar to do his job.
But we will keep working and hopefully find a way to get a limited amount of time and limited amendments on that issue.
____________________
