August 8, 1978
Page 24882
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, for the edification of the Senate, because it was not possible to bring up the legislative amendment, this is the original amendment referred to earlier, which I am sure will require some extended debate, at least I am informed that it will by my friends from the Northeast.
The bill before the Senate provides appropriations to support the operation of the crude oil entitlements program—
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes.
Mr. KENNEDY. I will be glad to make a motion to table now, if the Senator will yield for that purpose. Then everyone could go home, and continue the debate tomorrow. I would be glad to make that, and we can quit for the night and sleep on it, and make a decision.
Mr. DURKIN. We have heard the argument.
Mr. KENNEDY. If the Senator will yield, I will—
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I certainly have no intention to filibuster. If a filibuster is to be made, it would be made by someone else. But I do think this amendment ought to be explained, so that Senators will know what they are voting on, and I would hope, frankly, that this matter could be put over until tomorrow, so that somehow, some way, we can work it out.
Mr. BROOKE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. JOHNSTON. I yield to my friend from Massachusetts for a question.
Mr. BROOKE. I was just wanting to state to the distinguished Senator from Louisiana that this amendment has not been called up until this time, and that we certainly should have ample time to debate this amendment; it is a very important amendment from the point of view of both sides of this issue. I would hope we could debate the issue, certainly, for the duration of this session tonight and possibly for some time tomorrow before my senior colleague makes a motion to table the amendment.
Mr. JOHNSTON. I certainly agree with the Senator.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. How long does the Senator intend to hold the floor and debate the amendment?
Mr. JOHNSTON. I would second the suggestion of the junior Senator from Massachusetts. I think this ought to be explained at least tonight, before we have a motion to table. I would hate to see a motion to table made in the midst of the fatigue of Senators, and with their desire to get out of here and terminate the amendment. So I would feel it is necessary to continue to talk at least for tonight — not at all to filibuster, but simply to let the motion to table be made when more Senators are here, and better understand the mat-ter before the Senate.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. JOHNSTON. I yield.
Mr. MUSKIE. Will the Senator clarify his statement? He said "at least for tonight." Does he mean all night tonight?
Mr. JOHNSTON. I would hope Senators' appetites and their desire to go to bed would enable the majority leader to get us out of here before that.
Mr. MUSKIE. Despite the vaunted ability of the distinguished majority leader, I am not at all sure that is possible. Earlier today, with another serious policy matter before us, I found some Senators who objected to providing time, voting for cutting off regular procedures and moving ad hoc to repeal national policy without extended debate, without any consideration; and now, when they are given an opportunity, we ought to have a decent amount of time, with ample notice of the contents of the amendments; but, no, they are not willing to agree to that. That is irrational.
I would like to know, are we going to begin a rational process, or resist the very legitimate issue which the Senator from Louisiana has just raised? His amendment is not subject to a point of order as legislation on an appropriation bill, unlike his earlier amendment. It is an appropriate issue, from the point of this region's interest, as he sees it. It impacts upon the interests of our region, as we see them.
We have been engaged in discussions all day in an effort to make it possible for the Senate to consider these issues in a rational way, with ample time for all Senators to evaluate what is being proposed, the options that are being advanced, and the implications not only forLouisiana and Maine and New England, but also for Wyoming.
Now we are told that that makes no sense, but rather we are to engage in unlimited debate unless we find some other way to channel it as a limit.
So I put the question to my good friend from Louisiana, not as a criticism of him, but as a challenge to those who have now frustrated an effort to put this debate in a framework of decent and adequate time, and adequate notice. I put the challenge to them; I hope the majority leader may have, with the ingenuity for which he is noted all over the country, an ingenious way to put the thing back on track. But I do not relish the idea of staying here all night, or until somebody gets tired of talking. The Senator from Wyoming may have another speech prepared that he would like to make, but I do not want to stay here all night just to wear each other out. I think this issue deserves careful consideration, and needs at least the 48 hours that the majority leader's proposal advanced.
Yet there are apparently those who want us to vote like this. I prefer the Senator from Massachusetts' idea of a tabling motion now, rather than the implication or suggestion of the Senator from Wyoming. I mean, in one case we bring the matter to a head at a time that suits the convenience and the wishes of Senators. In the case of the Senator from Wyoming, he just challenges us to wear ourselves out in discussing this issue until the thing falls his way, I take it, because he has given us no other explanation for it.
I would like to know what the program for tonight is, whether we are expected to stay here all night in order to entertain the Senator from Wyoming, and whether we are expected to extend the debate on through tomorrow and into Thursday, which is the time on which the majority leader would like to focus.
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may be able to yield to various Senators without losing my right to the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. DURKIN. Reserving the right to object
Mr. HANSEN. I have to object to that, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. JOHNSTON. I yield to the majority leader for a question, without losing my right to the floor.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Would the Senator give the majority leader an idea as to what the Senator means by the word "tonight"? Does he mean 1 hour, or does he mean 2 hours, or does he mean all night?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Mr. President, what I mean is, I would intend to hold the floor until the majority leader would make it possible for us to recess or adjourn for the night, simply because I do not want a tabling motion to come at this hour of night, where Senators might be inclined to vote yes just to terminate the matter. It is, as the Senator from Maine says, a very serious question. It is one that involves about half a billion dollars a year, one that involves enormous transfer of funds around the country.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield the floor to me with the understanding that there will not be a tabling motion tonight, and that I will recess the Senate very soon?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia is recognized.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, the Senate convenes at 9:30 tomorrow morning, does it not?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is an order to convene at 9:30 in the morning.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that no further amendments to this bill be in order other than amendments to the amendment by Mr. JOHNSTON. This will assure that once this amendment is disposed of one way or the other, the Senate would go to third reading and passage, hopefully.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I know what the majority leader is attempting to accomplish. Are you including substitutes for this amendment?
Before I conclude, I too, want to express appreciation to the Senator from Louisiana, who has been all day attempting to work with the Members toward accommodating a very difficult problem.
I want him to know that I think all of us are underlining what the Senator from Maine has said, putting him in that position. We have different views on this issue, but he is operating in completely good faith. I would certainly want that known.
I just want to make sure of the exact request so that if we get into an issue of substitution or other aspects, we do not want to be foreclosed.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, under my request, substitutes for the amendment would be in order.
Mr. HANSEN. Will the majority leader state his unanimous consent request?
UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes. I ask unanimous consent, Mr. President, that with the exception of the amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from Louisiana, and amendments thereto, which include substitutes, no further amendments to the bill be in order, and that upon the disposition of that amendment, whatever that disposition may be, the bill go to third reading, and that without further debate or motion final passage occur.
Mr. McCLURE. Will the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes.
Mr. McCLURE. Is it my understanding that the distinguished majority leader is attempting to preserve for the Members whatever rights they would have with respect to the Johnston amendment?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes.
Mr. McCLURE. That would include amendments to the substitutes or any other motion which might be relevant to his amendment?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Relevant to that amendment, a right which Senators would have in any case. This request would not waive the rights of any Member to offer amendments of whatever nature as long as they are germane to the amendment by Mr. JOHNSTON.
Mr. McCLURE. Or they could offer substitutes or make any other motion available under the rules with respect to the Johnston amendment?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. That is correct.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Abby Reed and Eve Lubalin of my staff be granted privileges of the floor during all debate and votes on H.R. 12932, fiscal year 1979 appropriations for the Department of Interior and related agencies.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.