UNANIMOUS-CONSENT REQUEST--S. 1894 (Senate - July 11, 1996)

Mr. LOTT. I yield for a question.

Mrs. BOXER. As I listened to the Senator from Alaska, there is a way to break through all this.

As I hear the Senators in Nevada, they will not object to moving to the defense bill at all. As a matter of fact, as long as I have known them, they have worked hard on those bills, as hard as anyone else here. But they are saying, if this particular bill dealing with nuclear waste would be pulled, they would not object. If I might ask my friends, are they not saying that the reason they are objecting is because they are bringing this nuclear waste bill forward?

Mr. REID. Will the majority leader yield so that I may answer the question?

Mr. LOTT. I yield for the Senator to answer the question.

Mr. REID. I say to the Senator from California, I am a supporter of this bill. I am on the Appropriations Committee. One of the most troubling things I have done since I have been in the Senate is to have my friend, the senior Senator from Hawaii, come to me and say, `Can we move this bill?' and I say, `No.' There is no one in the Senate I have more respect for than the senior Senator from Hawaii.

We feel that the shoe is on the other foot. We are not the ones holding things up. It is being held up because they are moving on this bill, which the President said he is going to veto. Maybe we cannot continue this forever. But it is going to take weeks of the Senate's time on nuclear waste .

We know what our rights are, and we felt that we offered a reasonable proposal to move this along, get the appropriations bills done before the September reconvening of the Senate. But this is an issue that is important. It is important not only to the people in the State of Nevada but for this country. And for us to say we are going to walk away from this would be something that we cannot do.

[Page: S7753]

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could respond to the comments. Again, I have said several times today that I understand the feelings of the Senators from Nevada. I am sympathetic to them. But this legislation has been crafted very carefully, in a bipartisan way, by the committee of jurisdiction, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee. It has been in the making literally for years. I am under the impression that 65 Senators will vote to end the debate on this, will vote for cloture.

How can the majority leader refuse to bring up a bill and try to pass a bill of this consequence, which involves radioactive nuclear waste , when 65 Senators want an opportunity to vote on it? Now, I understand how they feel, but two Senators are thwarting the wishes of 65 Senators and their constituents all across America. I have no option but to bring up legislation of this importance, which involves that many States with that many Senators.

Mrs. BOXER. May I ask the majority leader this. I understand his point, but 74 or so Senators voted for the minimum wage, and we do not seem to get action on that. So it is a matter of priorities, I say.

Mr. LOTT. You got action on it because I worked with your leader and we made it happen, and it is going to be acted on and wind up on the President's desk.

Mr. REID. Will the Senator yield for one more question?

Mr. LOTT. I will be glad to, sure.

Mr. REID. I say, respectfully, to the majority leader, with whom I served in the House in a leadership position there and now in a leadership position here, that we know you have the right to bring this up. But, also, I, the Senator from Nevada,

did not work out these rules. These rules were worked out many years ago. It started with the Constitution and the Senate rules that are in existence. I did not draw them up. I am just playing by the rules. The majority leader knew--or should have known, as we say in the law--that this would happen. You are--and I do not mean `you' in the pejorative sense--holding up the progress; we are not. We could move on and we could have this bill passed, the one now before the body, our defense appropriations bill.