October 10, 1978
Page 35348
Mr. RIEGLE. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, and I will not object, either
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Then could we get it before the Senate, before the Senator proceeds?
Mr. RIEGLE. All right.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. DECONCINI. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, and I shall not object, I would just like to ask if there will be any more votes this evening.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I wish the Senator could stand in position just once, until the matter is laid before the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, and I do not intend to object, is the form of the bill the form that would be covered by the budget waiver?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The House bill would presumably be called up, and the Senate could offer any such amendments.
Mr. BELLMON. And the bill as brought up would be subject to a waiver?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The bill would be the House bill.
Mr. BELLMON. Which is subject to a waiver?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I believe that is correct.
Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, may I say I intend to offer a substitute with a change in title III which will not be subject to a waiver.
Mr. BELLMON. Is it the intent of the amendment of the Senator from Wisconsin that the waiver language that would be covered by the budget waiver would be to delete title III?
Mr. NELSON. The staff worked out the amendment in consultation with the staff of the Budget Committee.
Mr. BELLMON. I think if the Senator will check he will find that is not the case.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, will the Senator yield to me for a moment?
Mr. BELLMON. Be happy to yield.
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, if the formulation the majority leader suggested, that is to say, the use of H.R. 50 as a vehicle for the Senate to restore title III, whether in the form of a compromise or some other way, then we can cross that bridge when we come to it; but I agree with the Senator from Oklahoma that this bill, either H.R. 50 or whatever we enact, would be subject to the restraints of the budget resolution.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. BAKER. I yield.
Mr. MUSKIE. If the Senator will recall, the Budget Committee did act on a waiver which was reported to the floor and which, of course, is thus debatable, consistent with the requirements of the Budget Act.
Subject to that, there has been discussion between members of the staff of the Budget Committee and some members of the Budget Committee, as well as Senator NELSON and his staff and Senator CRANSTON and his staff, to try to come up with language which reflected the aims contained in the waiver resolution to the satisfaction of everyone concerned.
Now, that process has not been completed to the satisfaction of all members of the Budget Committee. I understand, if I correctly understood what has been said here this evening, that there is a continuing process underway now to accommodate the various Senators who are involved.
In any case, the waiver resolution reported out of the Budget Committee is still before the Senate, and, as I understand, it must still be disposed of by the Senate, and may conceivably be disposed of by whatever compromise is being worked out at the present time, as I understand the statements of the majority leader and the minority leader.
Am I correct in that, may I ask the minority leader?
Mr. BELLMON. May I respond before the minority leader answers?
Mr. BAKER. Go ahead.
Mr. BELLMON. As I understand, the Budget Committee did agree on an amendment, or did issue a waiver. Any negotiations since that time have not involved the minority. The compromise, so-called, I have before me has back in it title III, the removal of which was the
main thrust of the action taken in the Senate Budget Committee.
It seems to me what we have done here ad hoc is to undo what was done before it went to the Budget Committee.
Mr. BAKER. If my colleague will yield, the compromise the Senator was referring to cannot be the compromise I was speaking of because those negotiations are still under way. The ad hoc committee, consisting of Senator DOLE, Senator HATCH, Senator LUGAR, Senator JAVITS, and Senator PERCY on the Republican side are still trying to explore the possibility of working out some sort of report.
Mr. BELLMON. But they are not on the Budget Committee.
Mr. BAKER. I understand. If there develops tomorrow some basis for compromise, most certainly the Budget Committee should be involved in that effort. But the effort so far has been to see if people want to compromise and if there is a realistic possibility of doing so. I really do not see any danger with the action already taken by the Budget Committee or any threat to their jurisdiction. I would hope that the senior Senator from Oklahoma, or whoever he designated, would be fully involved tomorrow when they resume negotiations in an effort to bring this to a satisfactory conclusion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. MUSKIE. Will the Senator yield again?
Mr. BELLMON. I am happy to yield.
Mr. MUSKIE. I cherish my relationship with the Senator from Oklahoma, as he knows. I do not want there to be a misunderstanding as to what was going on. I was present at some of the discussions and it was clearly understood that the possible compromise language was not a commitment on anybody's part or the Budget Committee. The Budget Committee was not being represented as such. So the Budget Committee's position is reflected by the waiver resolution reported to the Senate. Whether or not the members of the Budget Committee who participated in drafting the waiver resolution can be satisfied by a compromise language which has been put together here is a question yet to be determined.
I have not sought to bind the Senator from Oklahoma, nor any other member of the Budget Committee. I have expressed my own personal view of the language being drafted. It was hoped at some point, if we ever get to that point — and it looks as though that possibility exists — when Humphrey-Hawkins would be on the floor for consideration that the language that would be developed would be a satisfactory resolution of the Budget Committee's problems. That decision has not yet been made. I would like to have my good friend from Oklahoma understand that.
Mr. BELLMON. Mr. President, I appreciate the reassurance the distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee has given. I am not sure members of the committee realize what violence this bill as the House sent it to us would do to the budget process that we have been attempting to establish here in the Congress. I hope Members will realize that this bill is far more than the title might suggest. It is much different than a full employment and balanced growth act. I wanted the Senate to be on notice that unless there are significant changes made in this act, there is no way I could support it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. BAKER. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I will assure the Senator from Oklahoma that I have no intention, so far as this Senator is concerned, of willingly seeing H.R. 50 become the action of the Senate. I indicated earlier that it was chosen as a vehicle, and I have no objection to that. But I personally think it would have a devastating effect on the economy of this country if H.R. 50 was enacted into law.
However, I do feel that there is a basis for agreement far short of H.R. 50 and much closer to, I believe, the point of view of the Senator from Oklahoma and my own than even the two Senate bills that are now on the calendar. I apologize to the Senator from Oklahoma for not involving him in the negotiations today as a representative of the Budget Committee. That is my fault. I acknowledge that.
Mr. DOLE. If the Senator will yield, it was understood in our meeting that we would have to satisfy any objections from either Senator BELLMON or Senator MUSKIE.
Mr. BAKER. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, may I propound a parliamentary inquiry?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it.
Mr. BAKER. Am I correct in saying that if the unanimous consent request is granted as propounded by the majority leader, that nothing in that order as far as its present formulation would change,alter, or extinguish any rights or opportunities of the Budget Committee in respect of that act?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
Mr. BAKER. I thank the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
The bill will be stated by title.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 50) to translate into practical reality the right of all Americans who are able, willing, and seeking to work to full opportunity for useful paid employment at fair rates of compensation; to assert the responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practicable programs and policies to promote full employment, production, and real income, balanced growth, adequate productivity growth, proper attention to national priorities, and reasonable price stability; to require the President each year to set forth explicit short-term and medium-term economic goals; to achieve a better integration of general and structural economic policies; and to improve the coordination of economic policymaking within the Federal Government.