April 10, 1978
Page 9383
Mr. MUSKIE. That depends on what the Senator from Georgia does. He certainly has that option. If the question is not raised in any other way by the Senator from Georgia, I intend to
Mr. TALMADGE. If the Senator will not raise a point of order, I shall not move to waive. If the Senator intends to make a point of order on the conference report, I intend to move to suspend the budget provision.
Mr. MUSKIE. Well, I think the issue ought to be raised, I say to my good friend, because what is at stake is not only the merits of the bill, but whether or not the Senate is disposed to meet its commitment to the budget process or suspend it when it becomes uncomfortable. I think the procedural issue needs to be raised. I did not raise it at the time the Senate bill was under consideration because of the pressure of the time, because I was willing to get to the substance.
But now, we have reached the point, the conference having acted, that the substance of the bill is such a serious question under the Budget Act that I think we need also to consider the procedural issues.
So I will raise the point of order unless the Senator raises the issue the way he suggested. Maybe we both will make our point.
Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, in accordance with section 904(b) of the Congressional Budget Act, I move that section 303(a) of that act be suspended with respect to the consideration of the conference report on H.R. 6782.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the motion. The motion is debatable.
Who yields time?
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator will state it.
Mr. MUSKIE. I understand that under the provisions of the unanimous consent agreement, no vote will take place until the hour of 11 a.m.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator is correct.
Mr. MUSKIE. Does that apply to the motion just made by the distinguished floor manager of the bill?
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. It does.
Mr. MUSKIE. I am prepared to debate the issue and I shall also debate the point of order question so that the Senator's motion will be understood in its full implications. It is immaterial to me whether the issue is resolved under a motion to suspend, which, to me, is more horrendous from the point of view of the Budget Act than a motion made under the provisions of the Budget Act. The Senator from Georgia is proposing to suspend the act when there are procedural options available under the Budget Act to reach the same point. I am perfectly willing to debate the issue on either ground.
Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry: As I understand the situation now, there will be two votes, the first one to occur at 11 o'clock on the motion I just made to suspend the provisions of the Budget Act, to be followed immediately thereafter, if my motion prevails, by a vote on the conference report. Am I correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. CLARK) . The Senator is correct.
Mr. MUSKIE. A parliamentary inquiry: The Senator from Georgia has now made his motion, I understand.
Mr. TALMADGE. I have.
Mr. MUSKIE. May I ask the Parliamentarian what, then,. would be the status of the point of order under section 303 if I should raise it?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's point of order would not be in order until after a vote on the motion of the Senator from Georgia. If the motion carries, the point of order would not be in order.
Mr. MUSKIE. As I understand it, it is not a question for the Parliamentarian, because it is not really a parliamentary question. A motion to suspend has been made in order to avoid the point of
order; so that, in the debate on the motion to suspend, I shall discuss the issue in terms of the point of order in order that, if the Senator's motion is defeated, there may then be a motion on the point of order.
May I ask this of the Parliamentarian: If I should make the point of order in the course of the next 2 hours and the motion of the Senator from Georgia fails, will a vote then occur, or would a ruling be made at that point on my point of order?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct; the Chair will rule at that time.
Mr. MUSKIE. I can make the point of order in advance of that time in order to have it in front of the Chair at that point?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. No, the point of order will not be in order until the motion of the Senator from Georgia is disposed of.
Mr. MUSKIE. A parliamentary inquiry: Under the unanimous consent request, I take it that the votes must follow back to back. Will there be an opportunity, following the vote on the motion of the Senator from Georgia, to make the point of order?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There would be such an opportunity.
Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from Kansas, a member of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. HODGES. Will the Senator yield for a unanimous consent request before he begins?
Mr. DOLE. Yes.
Mr. HODGES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Rhona Weaver and Steve Moore of my staff be accorded the privilege of the floor during consideration of and vote on H.R. 6782.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. Will the Senator yield for a similar request?
Mr. DOLE. Yes.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following members of the Budget Committee staff be granted the privilege of the floor during consideration of and votes on the conference report on H.R. 6782: John McEvoy, Karen Williams, Van Ooms, Dan Twomey, Lewis Schuster, and Jacques Cook.