ECONOMY, BUSINESS, FISHERIES
1976 96th Congress, 1st Session
Inflation: outlook for 1979, 576
Economy: outlook for 1979, 576
Businessmen Fretting Over Doomsayers, Bradley Graham, Washington Post, 577
Dollar Drama Could Return, Hobart Rowen, Washington Post, 578
Fourth Quarter Built Momentum, Art Pine, Washington Post, 578
Budget: timetable for month ahead, 576
Carter's Latest Budget Policies Familiar, Art Pine, Washington Post, 579
Tax Revolt, Adam Clymer, New York Times, 589
Tax Credits — Carter's Ploy, Edward Cowan, New York Times, 591
Monetary Juncture Critical, James L. Rowe, Jr., Washington Post, 581
Oil Customers Are Lining Up To Court Mexico, Marlise Simons, Washington Post, 583
Eastern Giant Awakens to Trade, Jay Mathews, Washington Post, 581
Organized Labor Heading Into Heavy Bargaining Year, Frank Swoboda, Washington Post, 581
Urban Crisis Has Not Been Rehabilitated Away, Susanna McBee, Washington Post, 580
Housing — It Shelters More Than The Family, Alan S. Oser, New York Times, 594
Tough Negotiator for Teamsters, New York Times, 589
OPEC and Iran Cloud Oil Cost, Art Pine, Washington Post, 582
Looking for Better Times in Russia, Kevin Klose, Washington Post, 583
Japan's Ohira Won't Set Off Economic Fireworks, William Chapman, Washington Post, 584
War Plaguing Black South Africa, David B. Ottaway and Carlyle Murphy, Washington Post, 584
Competitive Balance Shifting In Europe, Murray Seeger, Washington Post, 585
Canadian Economic Malaise Continues, Nancy Ross, Washington Post, 585
Mid-Atlantic, Ben A. Franklin, New York Times, 598
Inflation – A Showdown Is at Hand, Leonard Silk, Washington Post, 586
Consumers Pile Up Debt, Barbara Ettorre, New York Times, 588
Strategies for a Slowdown, Isadora Barmash, New York Times, 588
President vs. Economy, David E. Rosenbaum, New York Times, 590
Guidelines Today – Controls Tomorrow, Steven Rattner, New York Times, 590
Miller's Monetary Policy – How Tight? Clyde H. Farnsworth, New York Times, 591
Farm Aid – Legislating Higher Food Prices, H. J. Maidenberg, New York Times, 592
Deregulation – Panacea or Pandora's Box? Ernest Holsendolph, New York Times, 592
Profit Gains Expected for Most Industries, Phillip H. Wiggins, New York Times, 593
Oil Problems — How To Cut Consumption and Inflation, Anthony J. Parisi, New York Times, 594
Truckers Breaking Reforms? Winston Williams, New York Times, 595
Airlines – Profits Now But Cloudy Skies Ahead, Richard Witkin, New York Times, 595
Steel's Surprise – Demand Is High, Agis Salpukas, New York Times, 596
Can Detroit Finance the Car of the 1980's? Reginald Stuart, New York Times, 596
New England, Michael Knight, New York Times, 597
Banking – Street Is Getting Crowded, Deborah Rankin, New York Times, 597
Grassroots Optimism Is Undaunted, Douglas E Kneeland, New York Times, 597
South, Wayne King, New York Times, 598
Southwest, William K. Stevens, New York Times, 598
West Coast, Pamela 0. Hollie, New York Times, 599
576-599; January 18, 1979; Muskie notes that the coming year will be a difficult one for budgetary and fiscal policy reasons, and encourages his colleagues to read the assembled economic analyses that he asks to have reproduced in the Record. At this time the U.S., like the rest of the Western World, was experiencing the inflationary aftershock of the oil price increases that had been rippling through western economies since the initial oil price hikes imposed by the oil-producing nations in 1973 and periodically repeated since then. The 1978 rate of inflation in the U.S. was barely short of ten percent, which in turn threatened enormous federal spending increases for all inflation-indexed programs, and interest rates for home mortgages were at or above ten percent, threatening to dramatically slow the construction industry.
Fishing industry: proposed deferral of budget authority (see S. Res. 50), 1717
Saltonstall/Kennedy fishery reserve fund: OMB request for deferral, 1720
Fishing industry: proposed deferral of budget authority (S. Res. 50), 1720
1717-1720; February 1, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of S. Res. 50, a Kennedy (D- Massachusetts) resolution to disapprove the deferral of funds from the Fishery Reserve Fund, which had been proposed by the Carter administration as an element of its plan to phase out the reserve fund entirely in the 1980 budget. The fund was financed by a percentage of tariffs levied on imported fish products, and the National Marine Fishery Administration had developed a plan for the marketing and export of under-exploited species, so Senators from coastal states with substantial fisheries were strongly opposed. Muskie spoke briefly in support of the resolution.
Potato futures: prohibit trading on commodity exchanges (see S. 770), 6400
6400; March 27, 1979; Muskie is shown with Church (D-Idaho) as an original sponsor of S. 770, a bill to prohibit the trading in potato futures contracts by commodity exchanges. The continued manipulation of potato futures contracts made the goal of ending this trade in the commodity markets a perpetual one for Muskie and other Senators from potato-producing states.
Council on Wage and Price Stability: budget waiver (S. Res. 105) for consideration of S. 349, authorization, 6720-6722
6720-6722; March 29, 1979; Muskie speaks in support of S. Res. 105, a resolution waiving a provision of the budget law when legislation is reported after the mandatory reporting date of May 15, on S. 349, a bill increasing to increase funding and broaden the authority of the Council on Wage and Price Stability. Garn (R-Utah) argues that this waiver is not necessary and complains that committee Republicans were not even permitted to hold one day of hearings, and Muskie responds that the reporting of the waiver is a purely technical legislative duty and does not imply either a favorable or unfavorable view of the underlying legislation.
Potato — Dump the Futures, Maine Telegram, 6796
Potato futures: prohibit trading on commodity exchanges (S. 770), 6796
Potatoes: abolishing futures trading (S. 770), 6796
6796; March 29, 1979; Muskie mentions his support for the bill that would curtail trading in potato futures on the commodity exchanges, and provides an example of editorial comment to show that this sentiment is growing in Maine.
Aircraft operators: budget waiver (S. Res. 125) for consideration of S. 413, safety and noise abatement, 7885
Aviation: budget waiver (S. Res. 125) for consideration of S. 413, safety and noise abatement, 7885
Aircraft operators: assistance for compliance with noise standards (S. 413), 7885
Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act: enact (S. 413), 7885
7885; April 10, 1979; Muskie as the floor manager of S. Res. 125 explains that a waiver of the budget act is needed for S. 413, the Aviation Safety and Noise Abatement Act, because the bill contains authorizations for spending for multiple years, as is necessary for airport construction and development, and the general rule under the budget law is that bills authorizing spending cannot be considered unless the budget resolution for the year of the authorization is in place. Section 303(a) of the budget act allows this waiver procedure.
Soft drink products: territorial provisions in licenses to manufacture, distribute, and sell trademarked (see S. 598), 7983
7983; April 10, 1979; Muskie becomes a cosponsor of S. 598, the Soft Drink Interbrand Competition Act, a Bayh (D-Indiana) bill to clarify the circumstances under which territorial provisions in licenses to manufacture, distribute and sell trademarked soft drink products are lawful under the antitrust laws.
Small Business Act: budget waiver (S. Res. 156) for consideration of S. 918, amending, 11547
Small business grants for development of centers for technical information and international market development (S. 918), 11547, 11566-11568
Disaster loans: interest rate for homeowners, 11566-11568
11547; May 16, 1979; In taking up S. Res. 156, a waiver of the budget act to allow the Senate to deal with a bill reauthorizing Small Business Administration disaster loans, Muskie notes that the new bill provides a far shallower subsidy for disaster loans, and that the budget waiver is needed because the prior year’s bill had been pocket vetoed after the adjournment of the Congress.
11566-11568; May 16, 1979, During debate on S. 918, to reauthorize disaster assistance loan authority for the Small Business Administration, Muskie opposes an amendment which would subsidize the first $30,000 of a loan at a 1 percent interest rate, and the second $30,000 at 3 percent. The underlying bill proposed to make loans subject to the government’s cost of borrowing. Muskie expressed the view that this proposed subsidy was unwise and would lead to further abuse by borrowers, as had happened with this program in 1978.
Disaster loans: interest rate, 16521
16521; June 20, 1979; During debate on H.R. 4289, the supplemental appropriations bill, Muskie endorses the idea that the Small Business Administration should repay interest to the Treasury Department when it borrows for its loan program, and that the interest payments should be appropriated in the normal way. This was primarily an issue of maintaining transparency in budgeting and moving away from backdoor spending.
Inflation: national leadership needed, 17804
Inflation – Who's to be Honest on Economic Woes? Robert J. Samuelson, Washington Post, 17804
17804; July 10, 1979; Muskie says that real, non-inflationary increases in wages can come only from higher productivity, and that workers who chase wage increases simply to maintain their relative position financially are ultimately contributing to overall inflation in the economy, and includes an article that discusses the failure of Carter’s inflation program, which relied on voluntary guidelines for wage hikes and price increases.
Economic distress: providing public works and business financing (S. 914), 21719
Public Works and Economic Development Assistance Act: extension of programs (S. 914), 21719, 21720
21719, 21720; August 1, 1979; Muskie discusses S. 914, the Economic Development Administration bill, and expresses his strong support for the purpose of the program, but warns his colleagues that the House version of the legislation would retain an overly-broad eligibility standard, which would imply that 90 percent of the nation’s population lived in economically distressed areas, and in addition, contained a local public works program which cannot be justified because it contributes to inflation.
Railroads: restructuring Amtrak routes, 21780, 21781
Amtrak: Rail Passenger Service Act appropriations (S. 712), 21780-21782
21780-21782; August 1, 1979; Muskie says that amendments being proposed to the Amtrak bill, S. 712, would increase the federal subsidy for Amtrak service well beyond what has been allowed in the budget resolution, and that he intends to vote against all such amendments, but that he supports the bill as it was reported to the Senate from the Commerce Committee. It was long a routine in the Congress that any effort to reduce Amtrak’s routes was opposed by members, usually those from low population states, whose constituents would be directly affected by such closings. At this time, Maine had no rail passenger service of any sort, so Muskie’s opposition to retaining routes with low ridership was relatively easy.
Federal Mine Safety and Health Act: amend (see S. 1692), 22632
22632; August 3, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of S. 1692, a Melcher (D- Montana) bill to amend the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, by permitting States to enact their own mine safety plans and elect to accept federal coverage for state or locally-run mining operations. Most of the operations covered included sand and gravel mining operations, and the federal law did not specify that state-operated mines of this sort were to be governed by the Federal statute. In virtually all instances, such state and local operations were part and parcel of road maintenance efforts, and the additional costs imposed by the federal law could not readily be passed onto the customer except through higher state and local taxes. The issue arose because the Labor Department made the claim that the federal law must apply to state and local mining operations.
Fishing industry: reserve fund to support development projects (see S. 1656), 22677
22677; August 3, 1979; Muskie is added as a cosponsor to S. 1656, a Kennedy bill to amend the Saltonstall-Kennedy Act to provide for a national program of fisheries research and development.
Dept. of Treasury, Executive Office of the President, Postal Service, and certain agencies; appropriations (H.R. 4393), 22885, 22886, 22922, 22923
22885, 22886; September 5, 1979; Muskie comments on H.R. 4393, the Treasury appropriation for fiscal 1980, noting that the bill as reported is below the budget level, but that certain mandatory payments, primarily the federal pay raise, mean there is not much additional space in this appropriation for other spending.
22922, 22923; September 5, 1979; Muskie speaks in favor of a Javits (R-New York) amendment to delete language in the bill which would have the effect of barring the Internal Revenue Service from denying tax exempt status on white-flight schools, saying he has written the Service about the breadth of its proposed regulations, and that the new regulations issued meet his concerns and that the principle of nondiscrimination is involved, as well as the principle of free religious expression.
Susie Makes a Statement, Waterville (Maine) Sentinel, 24397
24397; September 13, 1979; Muskie notes that a Waterville newspaper editorial is making a point about economic inflation with the observation that the recently-minted Susan B. Anthony dollar coin contained less than three cents’ worth of metal.
Gold: world price, 24822
24822; September 17, 1979; Muskie notes that the price of gold has reached $350 an ounce, and recalls when it was $35 per ounce until 1971, when the U.S. abandoned the gold standard.
FTC: appropriations (H. J. Res. 402), 26977-26980
26977-26980; October 1, 1979; Muskie joins others to argue against a Melcher (D-Montana) amendment that would alter the formula used to retain train service in the Amtrak system, so as to make certain discontinued trains eligible for reinstatement.
SBA: disaster loan program, 27436-27438
Farmers Home Administration: disaster loan program, 27436-27438
Summary: Natural Disaster Loan Programs, GAO, 27438
27436-27438; October 9, 1979; Muskie says that the report he and Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) requested from the Government Accounting Office on the operation of the disaster loan programs of the Small Business Administration and the Farmers Home Administration shows the weaknesses and lack of accountability when two different agencies are both administering loan programs to respond to agricultural losses, and argues that reforms of the kind already passed by both the Senate and House are needed to make certain the programs can be improved. He is particularly concerned that a House-Senate conference committee on the bill may be seeking to change some of these reforms.
Dept. of Transportation: appropriations (H.R.4440), 30628
30628; November 1, 1979; Muskie comments on H.R. 4440, the Department of Transportation appropriations bill, and notes that although the budget authority provided in this measure is within budgetary ceilings, the actual outlays under it, combined as they are with prior-year authorizations for spending, could breach the budget ceilings, for which reason he intends to vote against the measure.
Airport and Airway Development Act: amend (S.1648), 34033
34033; November 29, 1979; In response to a question from the Majority Leader about the timing of a potential debate on S. 1648, the Airport and Airway Development Act, Muskie says that because discussions on the bill have not yet yielded agreement or compromise, and because two Budget Committee members had asked for a committee meeting on the matter, it did not seem likely to clear the way for the bill by Saturday morning.
Letter: Airport and Airway Development Act, by, 34412
34412; December 3, 1979; In Extensions of Remarks, Congressman Glenn Anderson (D-California) says that the Senate version of the Airport and Airway Development Act is a sell out to the industry and although Senators on the conference committee insist it reflects the Senate’s views, he has a letter from 16 Senators who disagree, and one of whom is Muskie.
Conferee on S. 914, multistate regional development commissions, 34675
34675; December 5, 1979; Because the regional development bill, S. 914, cuts across the jurisdiction of both the Banking and Public Works Committees, conferees from both committees are appointed, and Muskie is among them
Chrysler Corp.: emergency loan guarantee (S. 2094), 37075
37075; December 19, 1979; Muskie explains the budgetary impact of the Chrysler loan guarantee bill, which could be as minor as $1.5 million or as great as $1-2 billion, depending upon whether loan guarantees are needed to cover defaults on the loans. Chrysler was facing bankruptcy and applied to the federal government for assistance, which resulted in the loan guarantee bill that was developed in an effort to head off massive job losses in the company, and what was feared to be the effect of one of the world’s 10th largest manufacturing corporation going bankrupt.
Agricultural commodities: target prices for 1979 crops (H.R. 3398), 37371
37371; December 20, 1979; Muskie says that although he has usually opposed target price increases for crops, in this case, the seven percent increase is acceptable because it is far lower than the increase demanded by a substantial minority of the Congress, and because farmers are as subject to inflationary cost increases as any other American.
Chrysler Corp.: conference report on H.R. 5860, 37457
37457; December 20, 1979; When the conference report on H.R. 5860, the Chrysler loan guarantee bill is called up for approval, there is objection that nobody knows what it in it because it has not been circulated so Senators are being forced to vote on language they have not seen, and a discussion of this ensues in which Muskie takes brief part, but which ends with approval of the conference report. When the Senate reaches the end of its session, particularly when the end has been as protracted as in 1979, there is often maneuvering to bring up controversial bills in a time sequence that does not allow a filibuster to develop, and the Chrysler loan guarantee bill had become substantially controversial at this time.
ENERGY
1979 96th Congress, 1st Session
Coal: substitute for imported oil (S. Res. 175), 13240
13240; June 4, 1979; During debate on S. Res. 175, a Huddleston (D- Kentucky) resolution to encourage the use of domestic coal in place of imported oil, Muskie argues that this goal makes sense but that it must be accompanied by a recognition that clean coal technology must be pursued at the same time.
Alcohol Fuels Regulatory Simplification Act: enact (see S. 1200), 13265
13265; June 4, 1979; Muskie’s name is added as a cosponsor of a Bayh (D- Indiana) bill, S. 1200. The bill is intended to make the small-scale production and on-farm use of alcohol fuels more feasible by giving the Treasury Secretary authority to suspend regulations for alcohol production primarily targeted on production of alcohol for drinking, rather than as a gasoline additive.
Agriculture: small farm research and extension programs (S. 892), 14810
14810; June 14, 1979; During a debate on a new pilot program to encourage the production of what was then called "gasahol", but what is more commonly known as ethanol, Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) points out that even though these pilot programs are to funded off-budget, through loan guarantees, they still represent the possibility of substantial spending in future years, should the guarantees be invoked because the projects do not pay for themselves. Muskie very briefly endorses the gist of his comments.
Energy in New England, Representative Cohen (1974-75 excerpts), 18917
Dickey-Lincoln hydroelectric project, Maine — appropriations, 18917, 18924, 18925, 18932
Factsheet: Dickey-Lincoln School Lakes, Maine, 18925
Table: Electric consumption in Maine and New England, 1977, 18919
Telegram: Dickey-Lincoln hydroelectric project, Maine Governor Brennan, 18921
Energy and water development: appropriations (H.R. 4388), 18917, 18924, 18925, 18932, 19174
18917; July 17, 1979; In the debate over H.R. 4388, the Energy and Water development appropriations bill, Cohen (R-Maine) offers an amendment to strike the funds that would complete the Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Dickey-Lincoln hydro project in Northern Maine. Muskie argues that the economics of the project are sound, and that the region’s lack of alternative energy sources has contributed to economic hardship and loss of jobs in New England.
18924; July n17, 1979; As the debate over the Dickey-Lincoln project continues, Muskie argues with other colleagues over assertions that there is some other way for New England to generate the same amount of energy, and provides a comprehensive fact sheet on the project.
19174; July 18, 1979; The debate on the Dickey-Lincoln project comes to an end, with Muskie making very short remarks. The funds for the project were deleted.
Dept. of Energy: Committee on Budget consideration of S. 688, 19471
Dept. of Energy: unfavorable committee report on S. Res. 190, 19471
19471; July 19, 1979; Muskie notes that the Budget Committee has issued a negative report on a waiver for S. 688, the civilian energy programs because it is waiting for further anticipated requests for funding the full energy program from the Administration.
Synthetic fuels: economic and environmental problems, 22721
Energy: cost considerations, 22721
22721; August 3, 1979; Muskie cautions that the strong sentiment in favor of "energy independence" may have consequences for many other rights Americans take for grants, such as the right to have public input about the location of synthetic fuel plants, and says that even if all such questions cannot be definitely answered, an effort should be made to provide at least a preliminary review of the issues involved.
Energy Mobilization Board: expedite review process for non-nuclear energy projects (see S. 1806), 25840
25840; September 24, 1979; Muskie is shown as one of the original cosponsors of a Ribicoff (D- Connecticut) bill, S. 1806, to establish an Energy Mobilization Board whose function it would be to expedite the creation of energy programs designed to produce substantial new energy resources. The Ribicoff bill was an alternative to one being developed by the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, in that it paid more attention to environmental issues.
Energy Mobilization Board: expedite review process for nonnuclear energy projects (S. 1806), 25856
Resolutions by organizations: Energy Mobilization Board, Eastern Association of Attorneys General, 25857
Letter: Energy Mobilization Board, Richard S. Cohen, 25857
25856, 25857; September 24, 1979; Muskie notes that an expedited review for energy priority projects need not require bypassing environmental, safety, or state and local laws, and that the Maine State Attorney General is opposed to such a statute, as are his colleagues in the Eastern Association of Attorneys General.
Energy: development of domestic, supplies (S. 1308), 26745
Energy Mobilization Board: establish (S.1308), 26746
Energy: development of domestic supplies (S. 1308), 26745, 26746
List: Toxic chemicals possibly emitted in production of synthetic fuels, 26746
Comparison of S. 1806 and 1308 – Energy Bills Now in Committee, by, 26745
26745, 26746; September 28, 1979; Muskie introduces a series of amendments to S. 1308, the Energy Mobilization Board bill which incorporate the kinds of changes reflected in S. 1806, the bill he cosponsors with Ribicoff (D- Connecticut), and provides a comparison between the provisions of that bill and the one being called up for debate in the Senate. Muskie’s concern was that in a rush to authorize all sorts of synthetic fuel plants, little or no attention would be paid to potentially toxic byproducts of the synthetic fuel production process.
Priority Energy Project Act: enact (S. 1308), 26988, 27050, 27152, 27250
Energy Mobilization Board: establish, 27070-27072, 27077, 27080, 27081, 27084-27090, 27123-27125, 27138, 27139, 27152-27156, 27158, 27159, 27163, 27166, 27167, 27171-27174, 27257
Budget Act: waiver of provisions for the consideration of (S. 1308), 27043, 27044
Priority Energy Project Act: enact (S. 1308), 27070-27072, 27077, 27080, 27081, 27084-27090, 27123-27125, 27138, 27139, 27152-27156, 27158, 27159, 27163, 27166, 27167, 27171-27174, 27257
Memorandum: Effectiveness of S. 1806's Remedies To Avoid Delay, Senator Ribicoff, 27090-27092
Energy Mobilization Board: National League of Cities 27152
Energy Mobilization Board: National Association of Counties, 27154
Energy Mobilization Board: National Conference of State Legislatures, 27154
26988; October 1, 1979; In preparation for the debate on the Energy Mobilization Board, Ribicoff (D-Connecticut) introduces an amendment to S. 1308, which consists of the text of S. 1808, as a substitute. Muskie is shown as a cosponsor, but there is no Muskie text.
27043, 27044; October 2, 1979; Before S. 1308 can be debated, a waiver of the Budget Act is needed, and Muskie explains the procedure and the timing of that waiver, whereupon the waiver resolution is passed on a voice vote.
27050; October 2, 1979; As debate on S. 1308 opens, Ribicoff (D- Connecticut) calls up his amendment which is in the form of a substitute for the bill, and Muskie is listed as one of his cosponsors. There is no Muskie text.
27070-27072; October 2, 1979; Before debate on the substance of the Ribicoff (D- Connecticut) substitute begins, a number of Senators describe the lengths to which they have gone to assure that the legislation can move quickly but without interfering with the jurisdiction of all the committees that should be involved, and Muskie joins the discussion as it turns to the question of whether a formal time agreement can be reached or not. The issue at stake is that when no time agreement is in place, a simple motion to table the amendment takes precedence over further debate and is, itself, non-debatable. Muskie and those who support the Ribicoff substitute want an assurance that there will be adequate time for a full debate before a tabling motion is made.
27077; October 2, 1979; As the debate on the substitute amendment begins, Melcher (D-Montana) says he trusts that the right of the states to reject an energy project under their own state laws remains unimpaired, and Muskie says this is one of the points he intends to address in the debate and he is not quite certain that this authority is preserved by the Energy Committee version of the bill.
27080, 27081; October 2, 1979; When a unanimous consent agreement on the substitute amendment is finally reached, a discussion ensues in which Stevens’ (R-Alaska) desire to leave at a certain time the following day demands that his amendment follow immediately on the vote, an embellishment that is not acceptable to Muskie.
27084-27090; October 2, 1979; As the debate on the Ribicoff amendment heats up, Muskie engages Domenici (R-New Mexico) and Johnston (D-Louisiana) on what he says are the shortcomings of the Energy Committee version of the bill, arguing that procedural changes in law can and often do have a substantive effect in changing the law, and the proposed law would allow virtually any project that can claim it will directly or indirectly contribute to the nation’s energy independence, a fast track past health and safety regulations.
27123-27125; October 3, 1979; On the following day, as the Senate prepares to vote on tabling the substitute amendment, Muskie reprises his objections to the Energy Mobilization Board and the broad powers it is being given to override environmental and other laws and regulations.
27138, 27139; October 3, 1979; As the debate on the substitute amendment winds down, Muskie and Ribicoff (D- Connecticut) give their closing arguments in favor of the substitute and against the underlying Energy Committee bill.
27152-27156; October 3, 1979; After the substitute amendment is defeated, Muskie offers an amendment to strike the grandfather clause in the bill and to eliminate the ability of the proposed Energy Board to make decisions where state and local government officials have missed a deadline. Muskie’s argument is that this structure would not only intrude on legitimate state and local prerogatives, but would open each ruling to new court challenges, and defeat the whole goal of speeding decisions. Immediately he finishes making his prepared remarks, a motion to table is offered, and a lively and disputatious discussion ensues on procedure and timing.
27156, 27158, 27159; October 3, 1979; As the Muskie amendments are being debated, a Randolph-Ribicoff amendment, to authorize delay rather than suspension, of regulatory requirements is offered, and because it is an amendment to the language of the bill directly, it does not only modify the Muskie amendment, but takes precedence over it in terms of the vote, which causes a further discussion on how an existing unanimous consent agreement can be overturned without a formal unanimous consent agreement being in place.
27163, 27166, 27167; October 3, 1979; Following further negotiations, Muskie notes that the Randolph language has been modified somewhat, and that following a vote on it, the second half of his amendment, which would eliminate the provision permitting the Energy Board to substitute its judgment for that of a state or local government will be voted upon. Following the vote, which Muskie loses, a protracted discussion of the order in which further amendments may be considered is driven because of Stevens’ (R-Alaska) desire to take a 6:30 flight back to his home state.
27171-27174; October 3, 1979; When debate begins on the Huddleston (D-Kentucky) amendment, which would permit the Energy Board to suspend provisions of federal law, Muskie reacts by noting that the worst legislation is always produced when the Congress is trying to demonstrate to the voting public that it can respond to some perceived crisis or other.
27250; October 4, 1979; Muskie’s name is shown as a cosponsor of a Percy (R-Illinois) amendment to make the members of the Board subject to conflict of interest laws. The amendment is accepted.
27257; October 4, 1979; As the Senate prepares to vote on final passage Muskie makes a succinct statement of his reasons for voting against passage. The measure was approved on a 68-25 vote.
Dept. of Interior: appropriations (H.R. 4930), 28305, 28308-28310, 28375, 28376, 28730, 28737
Older persons: fuel cost assistance, 28730
Fuel costs: assistance to low-income households, 28730
28305; October 15, 1979; In the course of debate on H.R. 4930, the Department of Interior appropriations bill, Javits (R-New York) proposes an amendment which would fund the low income home heating assistance program by shifting money from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and Muskie asks for time in the consent agreement to make his argument.
28308-28310; October 15, 1979; As debate on the Javits proposal gets under way, Muskie argues that the procedural havoc this amendment will cause is as likely to slow down and complicate the program as it is to ensure that the funds are forthcoming in time. He reminds his colleagues that he is the originator of the low income home heating program, and makes the case that he can better see it properly funded under the budget procedures, as other Budget Committee members join in to support him.
28375, 28376; October 16, 1979; As Javits (R-New York) calls up a slightly modified form of his amendment, he makes the observation that Muskie and Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) are both in the chamber and Muskie says that is a coincidence but goes on to make the point that he made the day before: How can he function in the budget conference when a vote in the Senate may provide entirely different instruction.
28730; October 18, 1979; As the Senate considers the Javits (R-New York) amendment, Muskie makes the argument that by this action, he has lost a bargaining chip in the budget conference then still ongoing, but that he is not going to ask his colleagues, most of whom support the program, to vote against it a second time.
28737; October 18, 1979; Muskie says that while he generally supports H. R. 4930, the Department of Interior appropriations bill, he is concerned about an amendment the Appropriations Committee has made to the structure of the 1973 law governing the allocation of petroleum products to importers, because it would cut the product allocation entitlement from 50 percent to 30 percent for residual fuel oil, and freeze all other product entitlements at April 30, 1979, levels. He is also opposed to the use of the one-House legislative veto to deal with any proposed changes in this version of the emergency allocation program. He says he will not raise the point of order that lies against this bill, because he expects it to be corrected in conference.
Energy: accelerate development of domestic supplies (S. 932), 31190-31194, 31232, 31233, 31236, 31618, 31640, 31644, 31659, 31662
Energy: financing synthetic fuels research and production (S. 932), 31190-31194, 31232), 31233, 31236, 31618, 31640, 31644, 31659, 31662
Synthetic fuels: development (S. 932), 31190-31194, 31232, 31233, 31236, 31618, 31640, 31644, 31659, 31662
Defense Production Act: extension (S. 932), 31190-31194, 31232, 31233, 31236, 31618, 31640, 31644, 31659, 31662
Paper: Environmental Impact of a Large Synthetic Fuel Industry, President's Council on Environmental Quality, 31192
Synthetic Fuels Corp.: role of private industry, 31619
31190-31194; November 7, 1979; Muskie speaks in favor of the Banking Committee’s version of Title I of S. 932, a bill designed to promote and accelerate the development of synthetic fuels from domestic sources. Both the Energy and Banking Committees were involved in the development of this bill, the latter because of substantial loan incentives to be offered and the creation of a government-sponsored Synthetic Fuels Corporation to develop domestic supplies. The Banking committee bill focused more heavily on conservation, because it was believed that conservation could more rapidly reduce reliance on costly imports.
31232; November 7, 1979; As the Senate continues to debate S. 932, the synthetic fuels bill, it turns to discussions of the procedural order and how best to fit in the other legislation awaiting action, such as the second budget resolution.
31233; November 7, 1979; Muskie expresses his support for the changes in the synthetic fuels program in S. 932, noting that the authorization level would be up to $20 billion, and that the assorted environmental issues faced by synthetic fuels production would be examined before a comprehensive production plan was developed.
31236; November 7, 1979; As debate continues, Muskie reminds Johnston (D-Louisiana) who is the bill’s floor manager, that the time for a vote on the budget resolution is fast approaching when he asks to call up another amendment to his energy bill.
31618; November 8, 1979; Muskie says he will oppose a Percy (R-Illinois) amendment prohibiting the government-sponsored synthetic fuels corporation from undertaking construction of facilities for the production of such fuels, because this would yield valuable information and a yardstick by which to judge the applications of private sector construction efforts and a way to judge which of them may be worth loans backed by the federal government.
31640; November 8, 1979; As the Senate proceeds to debate the merits of alcohol as a fuel alternative, Muskie interjects to ask what all these different amendments amount to in dollar terms that will affect the budget.
31644; November 8, 1979; Muskie says he intends to support the Talmadge (D-Georgia) amendment to promote more alcohol production for energy purposes, as well as set up eight centers for the dissemination of wood energy technology and biomass technology, saying that the focus on smaller producers is particularly relevant to more rural areas.
31659; November 8, 1979; As the Senate voice votes on the Dole (R-Kansas) amendment to increase the fill rate of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, Muskie says there may well be budgetary issues associated with the amendment and Dole agrees to vacate the action adopting his amendment until the budgetary situation can be resolved.
31662; November 8, 1979; Later that day, Muskie explains the budgetary issues in the Dole amendment and says there is no budget problem with it, and, the earlier vote having been vacated, the amendment is passed by voice vote again.
Energy: accelerate development of domestic supplies (S. 932), 31212
Energy: financing synthetic fuels research and production (S. 932), 31212
Synthetic fuels: development (S. 932), 31212
31212; November 7, 1979; When Ribicoff (D-Connecticut) calls up his amendment to the synthetic fuels act, Muskie is listed as a cosponsor. The Ribicoff proposal was to authorize a 2-year study of carbon dioxide retention in the atmosphere as a result of synthetic fuels production, and was to be released without prior clearance or conditions. At the time, this issue was generally described as the “greenhouse effect” and the familiar litany of climate change was being sounded in a few quarters, and in Europe.
Fuel costs: assistance to low-income households (S. 1724), 31965, 32559
31965; November 9, 1979; Muskie is shown as a prime sponsor of a Boschwitz amendment # 380 to S. 1724, the Home Energy Assistance Act, designed to modify the formula by which funds are allocated under the law so as to direct a proportionately more generous share of the funds to states with higher heating costs and lower income households. The formula in the bill was to allocate half the money based on State energy expenditures and half on heating costs multiplied by number of lower income households.
32559; November 15, 1979; After a day’s debate on home heating fund allocation, Williams (D-New Jersey) offers an amendment as a compromise between the Boschwitz formula, which placed a stronger weight on temperature and heating-degree days and relatively less on states’ energy costs and the 50-50 formula in the underlying bill, by slightly weighting the heating-degree days more. Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of this compromise.
Fuel costs: assistance allocation formula, 32276, 32282-32292,32576
Fuel costs: assistance to low-income households (S. 1724), 32276, 32281-32292, 32576, 34307
Fuel costs: assistance to low-income households (S. 1724), to table Dole amendment, 32285
Fuel Cost Assistance to Low-Income Households – The Overtaxed Middle Class and the Special Session, Mary Adams, 34307
32276; November 14, 1979; Muskie explains that the goal of targeting the lowest income households in the coldest states is part of the reason to weight state energy expenditures as a lesser element of the allocation formula for home heating assistance, since overall energy expenditures reflect other uses of energy alongside heating costs. This debate over the allocation formula reflects the intersection of Senatorial proclivities to ensure that their state suffer no losses, combined with the increased availability of computer printouts which seemed to offer precision in calculating what a state would receive.
32282-32283; November 14, 1979; As the debate continues, Dole (R-Kansas) offers a substitute amendment using a funding formula that would restore the 50-50 split between cold and costs, by adding a minimum, so each state would receive no less than $120 per capita per single-person household, but Muskie argues that this merely takes away money from colder states and gives more to warmer ones, since the same amount of money would be allocated.
32283-32284; November 14, 1979; In the continuing debate, Muskie has an exchange with Nelson (D-Wisconsin) over the latter’s contention that a compromise, such as the 50-50 split in the allocation formula is the only way to get a bill, and Muskie’s claim that insufficient consideration has been given to the problems faced by cold-weather residents.
32284-32285; November 14, 1979; As this debate moves to its conclusion, Muskie argues again that the needs of colder states have received less than fair attention, and moves to table the Dole amendment, a motion that is rejected on a 41-50 vote.
32285-3289; November 14, 1979; Muskie points out that a version of an allocation formula which had the support of the majority of the Senate and the House is already on its way to the President for signature, and that is a more equitable formula than the one presented by the Dole amendment, and the debate becomes a dispute over the way the parliamentary situation has been set up to bar a further modification of their own amendment by either Muskie or Boschwitz.
32289-32290; November 14, 1979; Muskie continues with an exchange with Bentsen (D-Texas) and Metzenbaum (D-Ohio) who both urge compromise as the best answer to the issue.
32290-32292; November 14, 1979; The debate continues and Muskie notes that New England pays about 26 percent more for energy than any other region of the country because it is totally reliant on imported oil and has no local hydroelectric power with which to dilute that dependence, as an effort is made to develop an acceptable compromise on te formula so as to bring the debate to conclusion.
32576; November 15, 1979; Muskie announces that a compromise home heating allocation formula has been achieved, and that it has his support. He notes that under it, no state would receive less than the minimum under the two alternatives, the Committee formula and the one he and Boschwitz were advocating.
34307; November 30, 1979; Muskie says that the question of how the fuel assistance program is carried out is at least as important as the fact that it was enacted, and provides the viewpoint of a Maine activist who is concerned about the middle class.
Synthetic Fuels: reprinting (see S. Con. Res. 56), 34045
34045; November 29, 1979; Muskie offers S. Con. Res. 56, a concurrent resolution to authorize the printing of 3500 additional copies of a report called “Synthetic Fuels.”
Energy Mobilization Board: disapproval, 35284
Energy Mobilization Board-Act Now, Pay Later, Anthony Lewis, 35285
35284; December 10, 1979; Muskie expresses his doubts about the legislation to create an Energy Mobilization Board, a bill that is currently before a conference committee, but may soon come before the full Senate.
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS, HISTORIC PRESERVATION, WILDLIFE
1979, 96th Congress, 1st Session
EPA: pollutant standards, 971, 972
Air pollutants: relaxation of standards, 971, 972
Oxidant level: EPA relaxation of standards, 971, 972
Pollution: EPA relaxation of oxidant standards, 971, 972
EPA Set To Ease Smog Standards for Urban Areas, Margot Hornblower, Washington Post,972
Faked Case Against Regulation, Mark Green, Washington Post, 973
971, 972, 973; January 24, 1979; Muskie notes that the proposal by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to alter the public health standards for oxidants based on cost-benefit analysis and his proposal to limit the oxidant standards to one pollutant, ozone, runs the risk that this could be challenged as an entirely new standard, put in place without the necessary preliminary regulations and analysis, and that it supercedes the existing oxidant standards. He produces two news articles that explore these issues.
Health: abandoned chemical dump sites, 1327
Toxic waste: cleanup, 1327
$6 Million Hassle Over Spilled Poison, Joanne Omang, New York Times, 1327
Those Deadly Dumps, Washington Post, 1328
Dumps and Drinking Water, Bob Cummings, Portland Maine Telegram, 1328
1327; January 29, 1979; Muskie says that the problems of abandoned chemical dump sites and leakage of toxic materials are threatening the groundwater of many American communities and supplies several news stories that chronicle the problems arising as cities and states try to protect their groundwater and find some way of paying for costs of cleanup.
"Earth Revisited": CBS environmental series, 1483
Environment: CBS's "Earth Revisited" series, 1483
CBS: environmental series "Earth Revisited", 1483
Broadcast: "Earth Revisited", Walter Cronkite on CBS (series), 1483-1485
1483-1485; January 31, 1979; Muskie comments on a five-night television series on CBS, narrated by Walter Cronkite, then the leading news anchor in the country, on the theme of the natural environment and the threats to it posed by human activity.
House Rejects Senate Offer on Oil Spill Liability Fund, by (1978), 1727
Oil pollution: liability and compensation fund, 1727
Analysis: Liability for Discharge of Oil and Hazardous Substances – impact of House-Passed H.R. 6803, EPA, 1728
Analysis: EPA (1978), 1728
Letter: Oil pollution liability and compensation: Representatives John Murphy, Biaggi, Ruppe and Treen, 1729
Memorandum: Oil Pollution Liability and Compensation Fund, Sally Walker and Karl Braithwaite, 1729
Letter: Oil pollution liability and compensation: by, 1730
1727-1731; February 1, 1979; Muskie makes a statement revisiting the status of oil spill and hazardous waste liability legislation, making it clear that he believes the action of the House, in rejecting any reasonable compromise, leaves the Senate in a position where no legislation is better than the House-approved measure, since several other laws are already on the books to handle the oil spill liability question.
Mood of the Anti-Regulators Regarding Costs of Pollution Control, by, 3889
3889; March 5, 1979; Culver (D-Iowa) produces the text of a Muskie speech at the University of Michigan in which he discusses at some length the mood of anti-regulation which has seemingly overtaken the Congress and government, and points out that there is more than simply dollars involved in the costs of environmental regulation.
Report: Committee on Environment and Public Works, 11289, 13479
11289; May 15, 1979; Muskie reports three bills: S. 1146, a bill to amend the Public Health Act with a three-year extension of the Safe Drinking Water Act, Report No. 96-161; S. 1147, Amending the Toxic Substances Act, Report No. 96-162; and S. 1148, reauthorizing Title I of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, Report No. 96-164.
13479; June 5, 1979; Muskie reports S. 901, a bill to amend Sec. 204 of the Clean Water Act to repeal certain grant conditions of the Act, Report No. 96-200.
Public Health Service Act: extend appropriations (see S. 1146), 11292
Toxic Substances Control Act: extend certain provisions (see S. 1147), 11292
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act: reauthorize title I (see S. 1148), 11292
Pollution: flexible environmental program of integrated financial assistance to States (see S. 1136), 11292
11292; Notice only of Muskie’s introduction of three original bills from the Environment and Public Works Committee, S. 1147, extending the Safe Drinking Water Act, S. 1148, reauthorizing the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, and S. 1136, a bill authorizing a program of flexible environmental assistance to the states.
Pollution: flexible environmental program of integrated financial assistance to States (S. 1136), 11296
Environmental programs: integrated financial assistance to States (S. 1136), 11296
11296; May 15, 1979; Muskie explains that this bill, S. 1136, is an administration proposal, and says while it is worth looking at, he doesn’t doubt he will want to modify it, and that it should not be confused with grant consolidation efforts that mask actual reductions in environmental programs. He does not sound enthusiastic about the measure.
Solid Waste Disposal Act: amend and reauthorize (S. 1156), 13252
13252; June 4, 1979; As debate begins on the reauthorization of S. 1156, the Solid Waste Disposal Act, Muskie urges its passage, referencing the problems that can arise when waste disposal practices are not safe, as well as pointing out that this is not the vehicle by which past waste disposal problems and abandoned dump sites will be remedied.
Clean Air Act: industrial cost recovery provisions (S. 901), 14815, 34272
Clean Air Act: industrial cost recovery provisions (S. 901), 34272
14815; June 14, 1979; As the Senate takes up S. 901, a bill to extend a moratorium on the industrial cost recovery provisions of the Clean Water Act, Muskie describes the reasons for the adoption of cost recovery provisions in the 1972 law, and the subsequent problems arising in their implementation which led to the 1977 moratorium. He makes it clear that hearings will be held and that the goal of not underwriting industrial waste treatment facilities remains one that he will pursue. Although the index line referencing this floor action is clearly marked as a Clean air act issue, this is an error in indexing.
34272; November 30, 1979; When the House of Representatives altered the time frame for the moratorium in S. 901, Muskie and representatives of the House agreed to return to the time frame initially proposed by the Senate, as Muskie explains in passing the bill for the final time.
Hazardous substances: system of response, liability, and compensation for inactive waste disposal sites (see S. 1341), 14855
14855; June 14, 1979; Notice only of Muskie’s introduction of S. 1341, an Administration bill creating a system of response, liability and compensation for abandoned dump sites.
Waste disposal sites: hazardous and toxic chemicals from inactive or abandoned, 14880
Hazardous substances: system of response, liability, and compensation for releases from waste disposal sites (S. 1341),14880
14880; June 14, 1979; Muskie makes his introductory comments on S. 1341, the Administration bill dealing with waste disposal issues, and notes that he and his cosponsor, Culver (D-Iowa) plan to introduce an alternative, dealing only with hazardous substances, and not incorporating oil spill issues, because he found in prior years that the two issues are best handled separately.
TVA: increase amount of debt which may be incurred by (S. 436), 15636
Letter: EPA's new source performance standards, S. David Freeman, 15637
Comments: EPA proposed revisions to the standards of performance, 15637
Emphasis Now on Old Roots, Howell Raines, New York Times, 15639
Report: Improving Water Quality in the Tennessee Valley (summary), 15639
Interviews: TVA's new look, with S. David Freeman, 15640 - 15643
15636-15643; June 20, 1979; Muskie says that the increased borrowing authority in the TVA bill, S. 436, does increase budget authority but will have no effect on budget outlays, and does not require appropriations because the borrowing authority is repaid through electricity sales. He also expresses his strong support for the position the agency has taken in support of air and water quality standards, and provides some written information on that front.
Hazardous substances: liability, compensation, cleanup, and emergency response (see S. 1480), 17988
17988; July 11, 1979; Muskie is shown as cosponsor on S. 1480, a Culver (D- Iowa ) bill to provide for a comprehensive system of liability, compensation and cleanup, and local emergency response to spills or accumulations of hazardous substances.
Hazardous substances: liability, compensation, cleanup, and emergency response (S. 1480), 17994
17994; July 11, 17994; Muskie briefly speaks about his cosponsorship of S. 1480, an original bill intended to deal with hazardous wastes, both on an emergency basis and abandoned in dump sites by companies no longer in business, and says that further changes in the bill are doubtless necessary and urges that members of the Senate step up and offer such changes as the debate continues.
Hazardous wastes: disposal, 19895
Toxic Waste Disposal a Growing Problem, Science, 19895-19897
Environmental Time Bomb (sundry), 19897-19901
19895; July 20, 1979; Muskie notes that Science magazine has published a series of articles about the hazard of toxic wastes being dumped in out of the way places, where local residents are not aware of the risks they may represent, and urges that the information in these articles form the basis for federal legislation of hazardous substance disposal.
Letter: EPA's construction grant program, Barbara Blum, 21097
21097; July 27, 1979; During debate on the HUD-Independent Agencies appropriation, Muskie offers an amendment to strike language that would prohibit retroactive regulations on waste water treatment projects, and notes that he has obtained from both the Environmental Protection Agency and from Senator Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) agreement to limit retroactive regulations on projects where construction will begin within 6 months of the project grant, with the agreement that the Environment and Public Works Committee will revisit the construction grant program of the EPA.
Water: treatment systems for small communities, 22609
Public Health Service Act: extend appropriations (S. 1146), 22609
EPA: drinking water program implementation, 22609
22609; August 3, 1979; Muskie makes a brief statement about the Safe Drinking Water Act, noting the differences in the House- and Senate-passed versions of the bill.
Oilspills: liability for cleanup, 27853
Liability for Oil Pollution — U.S. Law, Allan Mendelsohn and Eugene R. Fidel, Journal of Mendelsohn, Allan: tribute, 27853
Maritime Law and Commerce, 27854-27859
Table: Comparable State oil spill liability provisions, 27859
27853, 27854-27859; October 11, 1979; Muskie says that although the debate on oil spill liability has been under way for 13 years or so, liability issues and compensation issues have been more fully fleshed out but questions if an overall liability fund is a good idea or whether its existence would tend to undermine the care that should be taken to prevent spills in the first place, and provides a comprehensive review of the state of law on this subject.
Toxic Chemical Spills — Living on the Margin, Washington Post, 28600
Toxic chemicals: controlling, 28601
28600, 28601; October 17, 1979; Muskie notes that cleaning up chemical and other toxic wastes may be far cheaper than dealing with the repercussions afterwards, and endorses an editorial which makes this point.
Conferee on S. 1143, Endangered Species Act appropriations, 31300
31300; November 7, 1979; Muskie is appointed a Senate conference on S. 1143, the Endangered Species Act Amendments.
Dept. of Interior: conference report on H.R. 4930, 31933
31933; November 9, 1979; Muskie makes a very brief comment on the conference report on H.R. 4930, the appropriations bill for the Department of Interior and related agencies, and notes that while the bill falls within the functional categories ceilings of the second budget resolution, he remains concerned about the ability of the Appropriations Committee to remain below the total.
Heating units: require efficiency improvements (S. 1335), 33870
33870; November 28, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of a Javits (R-New York) amendment to S. 1335, a bill promoting energy efficiency. The Javits amendment is designed to reduce the observable differences between reported auto fuel efficiency per gallon, and the actual experience of auto buyers and drivers. Posted rates of fuel efficiency were rarely achieved in practice, and the purpose of the amendment was to narrow that gap.
Outdoor Life Conservation Award: John N. Cole recipient, 34299
Catfish Hunter – A Candidate for the People, John N. Cole, New York Times, 34300
Cole, John N.: tribute to Outdoor Life Conservation Award recipient, 34299
Striped Bass Is the Cadillac of Sport Fish, John N. Cole, 34300
History: Outdoor Life Annual Conservation Award, 34300
Christmas Garland – Taking the Tree, John N. Cole, National Wildlife, 34303
34299, 34300, 34303; November 30, 1979; Muskie notes that John N. Cole, a Maine journalist and naturalist has been awarded the annual prize of the Outdoor Life Conservation Award, to honor his work in conservation and his commitment.
Public Buildings Services: establish within GSA (see S. 2080), 34677
34677; December 5, 1979; Muskie joins all his colleagues on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works to become a cosponsor of S. 2080, a Moynihan (D-New York) proposal to reorganize the General Service Administration’s public building program. Hearings earlier in the year had persuaded the Committee that the public building program was in need of an overhaul. Moynihan cited an increase in leasing of over 100 percent from 1966 to 1979, with a cost increase from $131 million to $520 million estimated in 1980, and argued that the cumulative costs over time were much greater than necessary.
Environment: effect on by toxic chemicals, 35287
Toxic chemicals: disposal, 35287
Toxic Chemicals — Everyday Risks, Washington Post, 35287
35287; December 10, 1979; Muskie says that a recent incident in Canada involving transhipment of hazardous toxic chemicals should be seen as a wake up call for Americans, as it appears more and more chemically active substances are being generated and combined in the environment, and he notes that the Environment and Public Works Committee is beginning to develop legislation to respond to this threat to human health.
Deep Seabed Mineral Resources Act: provisions of enacted S. 493, 36076
36076; December 14; 1979; Muskie says that the pollution controls written into the S. 493, the Deep Seabed Mineral Resources Act by the Environment and Public Works Committee are a recognition that the water and air pollution statutes will apply to this new activity to prevent damage to the deep seabed and marine life
NATIONAL SECURITY & FOREIGN AFFAIRS
1979; 96th Congress, First Session
Interview: World reaction to U.S. foreign policy, with Richard N. Gardner, by Alberto Ronchey, 1732-1735
1732-1735; February 1, 1979; Muskie says that an interview given by the U.S. Ambassador to an Italian news outlet helps provide a perspective on how other people see the U.S., through the questions in which they are interested.
"China": additional printing (see S. Res. 77), 2859
2859; February 21, 1979; On Muskie’s behalf, Levin (D-Michigan) send a resolution, S. Res. 77, to the desk and asks for its consideration. The resolution provides for the printing of eight hundred additional copies of the Senate document No. 96-4, called “China,” detailing Muskie’s trip in fall, 1978, to the Peoples’ Republic.
China, Peoples' Republic of: nomination of Leonard Woodcock, 3184
Woodcock, Leonard: nomination, 3184
3184; February 26, 1979; Muskie speaks in favor of promoting Leonard Woodcock from the position of Chief of the U.S. Liaison Office in China to the position of U.S. Ambassador to China when the U.S. and China exchange formal diplomatic missions on March 1.
China, Republic of, maintenance of commercial and cultural relations with (S. 245), 4825
Taiwan Enabling Act: enact (S. 245), 4825
4825; March 13, 1979; When Carter announced in December of 1978 that the U.S. would extend official recognition to the Peoples’ Republic of China, legislation was developed, S. 425, to provide for quasi-official institutions through which U.S.-Taiwanese relations could be continued, and it is during debate on this legislation that Muskie speaks in its favor and argues against amendments which, by gutting the legislation, would essentially either preclude relations
with China or terminate relations with Taiwan. Both China and Taiwan at this period insisted that there was only "one China" but each insisted that it was the legitimate government of that one China.
Nazi war criminals: West Germany statute of limitation (see S. Res. 99), 5756
5756; March 21, 1979; Muskie is added as a cosponsor to S. Res. 99, a Cranston (D-California) resolution expressing the sense of the Senate with respect to the statute of limitations in West German law that affect those guilty of war crimes. At this time, the Federal Republic’s statute of limitations on murder, under which former Nazis were tried, was set to expire on December 31, 1979, and the resolution urged its extension or abolition.
UN Conference on Law of the Sea, 7886
7886; April 10, 1979; Muskie is named to be one of the congressional advisors to the eighth session of the Law of the Sea Conference.
Dept. of State: appropriations (S. 586), 11262, 11268
Foreign Relations Authorization Act: enact (S. 586), 11262, 11268
Board for International Broadcasting: appropriations (S. 586), 11262, 11268
International Communication Agency: appropriations (S. 586), 11262, 11268
Rhodesia: lifting economic sanctions against, 11262
11262; May 15, 1979; Muskie briefly states his position on the question of lifting sanctions on Rhodesia, a perennial foreign relations issue throughout the 1970s. The white government of Rhodesia, a British colony in east Africa and named for Cecil Rhodes, declared a Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) on November 11, 1965, in the face of the British decolonization effort, which was to withhold independence until there was majority African rule. Some 15 years of conflict among Rhodesians, black and white, ensued, and the United Nations Security Council authorized its first economic sanction against Rhodesia, which were honored by most Western nations, including the U.S. The UDI struggle was a stark black-and-white dispute and, as a result, in domestic politics, lifting sanctions became a sturdy plank in the conservative platform.
11268; May 16, 1979; Muskie outlines the budget numbers as they apply to S. 586, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, and warns that as the Committee is preparing to report three other international aid bills, money within this budget function will be tight, and will become even tighter in subsequent years.
Arms Export Control Act: appropriations (S. 584), 12136
Foreign Assistance Act: appropriations (S. 584), 12136
International Security Assistance Act: enact (S. 584), 12136
12136; May 22, 1979; Muskie is listed as a cosponsor of a Byrd (D-West Virginia) amendment No. 178, to the Arms Export Control Act, S. 584, to make a $50 million military loan to Turkey into a direct grant. Muskie cosponsored this action on the morning of the vote, when for the first time, substantial aid to Turkey was approved, despite the lack of progress on peace in Cyprus, in part because of the Carter administration’s strong support for it.
Pope John Paul II: visit to Poland, 13812, 13814
Poland: visit by Pope John Paul II, 13812, 13814
Polish origin, 13812, 13814
Personal Polish heritage, 13814
13812, 13814; June 7, 1979; Muskie leads a colloquy with other colleagues on the issue of the visit of Pope John Paul II to his native Poland, an event which was unprecedented in the history of Eastern European Communism, and one which was subsequently seen as the basis for many of the changes in Poland, including the growth of labor unions, which occurred the following year.
Armed Forces: procurement of aircraft, missiles, naval vessels, tracked combat vehicles and other weapons (S. 428), 14324
14324; June 12, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of a Javits (R-New York) amendment No. 243 to the military procurement bill, S. 428, dealing with the United Nations economic sanctions against Rhodesia. The Javits amendment would have delayed any lifting of sanctions until December 1, 1979, after the British Government was scheduled to act on the issue. The bill contained language allowing a partial lifting of sanctions by June 30 for the purpose of importing chrome and other strategic materials. The argument being made at the time was that the world’s only other major supplier of chrome was the Soviet Union, and the Armed Services Committee found it persuasive. The Javits amendment was developed in a full-day meeting of the Foreign Relations Committee, and approved 8-1 by the Committee, and represented a different point of view, which was that the U.S. should not be seeking or appear to be seeking a confrontation with most of the African nations. At this time, only South Africa was tentatively in favor of lifting the sanctions.
Armed Forces: procurement of aircraft, missiles, naval vessels, tracked combat vehicles and other weapons (S. 428), 14559, 14560
Table: Defense appropriations (selected data), 14560
14559, 14560; June 13, 1979; Muskie speaks in favor of the Senate version of the military procurement bill, S. 428, and notes that the Committee is within the budgetary targets, and expresses the hope they can prevail over the House side in conference so as to bring back a final bill that remains fiscally responsible.
Strategic and Critical Materials Stock Piling Act: revision (H.R. 2154), 14569
14569; June 13, 1979; In debate on H.R. 2154, Muskie says that while he supports the bill to require acquisitions for the strategic stockpile to be authorized by Congress, he does not believe the special three-year fund to be comprised of receipts for stockpile material sales to be sound budgetary practice, and Hart (D-Colorado) says the fund has the Administration’s support over the House version, which creates a permanent fund.
SALT II: Senate ratification, 14846, 14847, 34430-34435
SALT II: answering basic questions, 14846, 14847
14846, 14847; June 14, 1979; Muskie makes a statement about the political approach to the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty, the second effort to reduce and control the number of nuclear warheads and launchers held by both U.S. and Soviet forces, and warns that efforts to so alter any treaty’s language as to make it unacceptable are simply a way to avoid being held accountable on the issue of arms control. At this time, the political division between those who favored arms control and those who did not was widening, as the latter group persuaded itself that the Soviet Union and its bloc of supporting nations were growing stronger and even posed an economic challenge to the West. This viewpoint has failed to withstand exposure to the facts, but at the time, continued Soviet secretiveness helped make this argument more plausible.
Armed Forces: procurement of aircraft, missiles, naval vessels, tracked combat vehicles and other weapons (S. 429), conference report, 15197
15197; June 18, 1979; Muskie says the military procurement conference report, S. 429, falls within the budget limits, and congratulates the committee on maintaining budgetary discipline.
Foreign Assistance Act: development assistance programs (S. 588), 15443
International Development Assistance Act: enact (S. 588), 15443
15443; June 19, 1979; Muskie makes a brief statement on the budgetary effects of S. 588, the International Development Assistance Act, and notes that as a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee which develops this law, he is aware of the many difficult decisions that have had to be made to comply with budget limitations.
Appropriations: supplemental (H.R. 4289), 16300, 16301, 16317,16328,16521
Indochinese refugees: assistance, 16300
16300; June 25, 1979; During debate on H.R. 4289, the supplemental appropriation, Boshwitz (R-Minnesota) offers an amendment dealing with refugee assistance for those fleeing Indochina, and Muskie explains that although the spending levels are already at budgetary limits, amendments can still be offered, so long as they are accompanied by spending reductions elsewhere that serve as offsets.
16317; June 25, 1979; As the debate on H.R. 4289 continues, Dole (R-Kansas) offers an amendment to increase funds for the Selective Service program, and when he is asked by the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, Stennis (D-Mississippi) to hold off, says that he is afraid that if he pulls back and someone else gets an amendment approved before he can straighten his amendment out, there will be no allowance left under the budget to accommodate the $1.1 million he wishes to add. He appeals to Muskie to confirm this, and Muskie does so, but does not take any other part in the debate.
16328; 16238; June 25, 1979; Muskie opposes a proposal to cut food stamp funding in H.R. 4289, the supplemental appropriations bill, because uncertainties about participation rates and altered program eligibility coupled with uncertainty of the economic conditions overall make it likely that the program will require rather more spending than less. Programs for which eligibility is based on financial factors see increased usage in the face of higher unemployment and decreased usage in period of high employment, so program costs are always subject to variability, and must be estimated at the beginning of each fiscal year.
16521; 16521; June 20, 1979; During debate on H.R. 4289, the supplemental appropriations bill, Muskie endorses the idea that the Small Business Administration should repay interest to the Treasury Department when it borrows for its loan program, and that the interest payments should be appropriated in the normal way. This was primarily an issue of maintaining transparency in budgeting and moving away from backdoor spending.
U.S. Policy in Asia — A View From Capitol Hill, Senator Glenn, 16595-16597
Glenn, Senator: U.S. policy in Asia, 16595
16595; June 26, 1979; Muskie recommends to his colleagues a very broad speech given by Glenn (D-Ohio) which touches on all the issues, economic and political, affecting the diverse nations of the Pacific basin.
Loring AFB, Maine: realignment, 18193, 18194
Letter: Loring AFB, Maine, to President Carter, by, 18193
Military installations: construction (S. 1319), 18193, 18194
18193, 18194; July 12, 1979; Muskie speaks on S. 1319, the military construction bill and launches a strong defense of the Maine SAC base at Limestone, in northern Aroostook County, Loring AFB, which has been under a cloud since 1976 because of the Air Force desire to realign the base and cut it back by more than four-fifths. Muskie points out that this virtually eliminates a major mainstay of the Aroostook economy, and will end by costing the federal government more over a long period than retaining Loring, a decision that the Armed Services Committee has reached in this bill, and for which he applauds them.
Pilgrimage to Poland, John Krol, 19891
Krol, John: visit to Poland, 19891
19891; July 20, 1979; Muskie speaks about the report brought back by Cardinal Krol of the effect on the Polish people of the visit by John Paul II to his native country, both as a national revival and a religious one.
Warsaw, Poland: uprising and the Polish resistance in, 20260
20260; July 23, 1979; Muskie speaks in favor of a Joint resolution, H. J. Res. 373, to commemorate the 1944 Warsaw uprising, in which Poles battled occupying German troops as the war in the east was drawing to a close, and the September 1, 1939 Nazi invasion of Poland, which marks the beginning of World War II.
Depts. of State, Justice, Commerce, the Judiciary and related agencies: appropriations (H.R. 4392), 20301
20301; July 24, 1979; Muskie says that although he will vote for the State-Justice appropriations bill, H.R. 4392, the overall outlook for appropriations to remain within budgetary guidelines is not good, and the deficit may well be as much as $5 or $6 billion higher than was anticipated by the first budget resolution.
Armed Forces: revise special pay provisions for certain health professionals (see S. 523), 22412
22412; August 2, 1979; Hart (D-Colorado) adds Muskie as a cosponsor to S. 523, the Uniformed Service Health Professional Special Pay Act. A shortfall in military physicians at this time had limited health care for active duty dependents and retirees, forcing higher costs for military families when the care was obtained from civilian health care professionals, and increasing government costs as well.
Letter: Pope John Paul II address to Congress by, 23563
23563; September 7, 1979; Muskie is shown as one of a majority of Senators signing a letter to invite the Pope to address a joint session of the Congress when he visits Washington on his forthcoming trip to the United States.
Curtis, Kenneth M.: nomination, 26495
Letter: Nomination of Kenneth M. Curtis, Maine Governor Brennan,26496
Smith, Thomas W. M.: nomination, 26496
26495, 26496; September 27, 1979; Muskie speaks in favor of the confirmation of former Maine Governor, Ken Curtis, to be the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, and points out his long association with Canadian-U.S. affairs, as well as the substantial support the nomination has received in Maine itself.
Cuba: presence of Russian troops, 27120
27120; October 3, 1979; Muskie makes a brief statement about a Soviet troop brigade reported to be in Cuba, and says Carter’s response was the appropriate one, letting Soviets know that their presence is noted and that any actions taken by them will receive an appropriate U.S. response without, at the same time, losing sight of the significance of SALT II talks to the future of both the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The 3000-man Soviet combat brigade was first revealed by Church (D-Idaho), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and by the first of October, Carter had created a military task force for the Caribbean, located in Florida, to provide a means of continued surveillance and anticipatory response. This development followed a period of increased Cuban military activity in African conflicts, and a Castro demand that the U.S. vacate its bases at Guantanamo Bay. Bombings of the Cuban United Nations Mission by Cuban exile groups, and Cuban support for the successful overthrow of the government of Anastasio Somoza in Nicaragua in July, 1979, exacerbated the situation.
Letter: World Bank-U.S. participation, by, 27445
27445; October 9, 1979; In the course of trying to explain that an appropriation of dollars does not necessarily mean the dollars will be spent, Inouye (D-Hawaii), chairman of the Foreign Operations Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee, argues that the appropriation of funds for the World Bank is required by the Constitutional demand that contingent liabilities be backed by appropriations, but that the funds are never actually spent, and includes a letter, to which Muskie is a signatory, which lays out these details more fully.
Newsletter: God Bless Americans, Rowland Frazee, Royal Bank of Canada, 28599
Roosevelt Campobello International Park Commission: cooperative work, 28599
Canada: Roosevelt Campobello International Park Commission, 28599, 4751
28599; October 17, 1979; Muskie notes that a friend of his, who serves on the Roosevelt Campobello International Park Commission is one of the alternate Canadian members, and has also written a comment about the Canadian view of Americans.
4751; March 13, 1979; This is an error; the referenced page reflects House proceedings dealing with Taiwan.
National Security and the Law of the Sea, Elliot L. Richardson, 28602
Law of the Sea Conference, 28602
Oceans; resolution of international issues concerning, 28602
28602; October 17, 1979; Muskie recommends the statement of Elliot Richardson at the launch of a ship from Bath, Maine, in which he outlines how the laws affecting international waters pose a potential problem for U.S. naval mobility, as more countries assert national boundaries well beyond the traditionally accepted 12-mile and 3-mile limits, and as the number of narrow straits subject to such claims increase the number of choke points in navigation.
29584; October 25, 1979; Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) pays tribute to the efforts of his brother John, and Muskie to have the government of West Germany acknowledge and provide compensation for a specific group of Polish victims of the Nazi concentration camps, a topic on which he supplies a magazine article in explanation.
Defense Production Act: extension (S. 932), 30682, 31212
30682; November 1, 1979; Muskie is listed as one of the original sponsors of a Ribicoff (D-Connecticut) amendment to S. 932, the Defense Production Act, to authorize a study of the carbon dioxide emissions that might accompany a substantial increase in the production of synthetic fuels.
31212; November 7, 1979; 31212; November 7, 1979; When Ribicoff (D-Connecticut) calls up his amendment to the synthetic fuels act, Muskie is listed as a cosponsor. The Ribicoff proposal was to authorize a 2-year study of carbon dioxide retention in the atmosphere as a result of synthetic fuels production, and was to be released without prior clearance or conditions. At the time, this issue was generally described as the “greenhouse effect” and the familiar litany of climate change was being sounded in a few quarters, and in Europe.
Dept. of Defense: appropriations (H.R. 5359), 31107, 31882, 31883, 31891
Armed Forces: pay comparability, 31882, 31883
Dept. of Defense: procurement from high unemployment areas, 31107
31107; November 6, 1979; During debate on H.R. 5359, Muskie notes that the action taken during earlier debate on the bill to repeal a provision that exempted the Defense Department from seeking procurement contracts from labor surplus areas is not one he supported, because he believes that using Defense contracts as a means of local economic stimulation risks undercutting the basis of contracting on low bids or the capability of the contractor to fulfil the terms of the contract.
31882, 31883; November 9, 1979; During debate on H.R. 5359, the Defense Department appropriation bill, Muskie announces he will oppose an amendment raising military pay by 10.4 percent rather than the 7 percent raise slated for all other federal employees, because it breaches the budget ceiling both for its specific function and overall, will not help the recruitment shortfall significantly, and will inevitably lead to granting civilian employees of the Department a similar pay raise. Under the pay comparability law, civilians are entitled to go to court to enforce equal pay requirements.
31891; November 9, 1979; As the debate over military pay continues, Muskie, in an exchange with Cohen (R-Maine) says he has noticed that there are no Senators who are consistently conservative about spending across the board.
People's Republic of China Welcomes American Friends, George C. Fetter, Bates College (Maine) Bulletin, 31289
Bates College, Lewiston, Maine: trip to People's Republic of China, 31289
China, People's Republic of: Bates College trip to, 31289
Poem: Mao-tai Toast, Jack Barnett, 31291
31289; November 7, 1979; Muskie says that a recent trip by a Bates College professor and 22 of his students to the People’s Republic of China reflects a four-year effort on their part to gain the necessary approvals and visas, and provides a copy of the trip report.
Loring AFB, Maine: construction, 32063
Dept. of Defense: military construction appropriations (H.R.4391), 32063, 32064
Report: Loring AFB (Maine) Construction Budget, 32064
Table: Military construction budget, 32064
32063, 32064; November 13, 1979; During debate on H.R. 4391, the military construction appropriations bill, Muskie notes that he is pleased that the Secretary of Defense has announced that an earlier decision to reduce Loring Air Force Base has been reversed, but points out that because the decision to cut back was under consideration by the Air Force for over three years, needed repairs and upgrades at Loring have for too long been overlooked.
Tehran: release of U.S. Embassy personnel (see S. Res. 292), 33824
33824; November 28, 1979; Muskie joins most of his colleagues as cosponsors of S. Res. 292, a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that all U.S. personnel seized by Iran must be released immediately and unconditionally, and urging the United Nations Security Council to take all measures necessary to secure their release.
A combination of inflation and repression in Iran in the mid-1970s culminated in 1978 in a year of rioting, the declaration of martial law and the killing of protesters by the military, a series of events which led to the departure of the Shah, without abdication, in January, 1979, and to the return of the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini, who became the effective leader of the country. He declared it an Islamic Republic in April, 1979, rejected U.S. efforts to normalize relations, and when the Shah was admitted to the U.S. for the treatment of his terminal cancer, demanded his extradition to face charges in Iran. The revolutionary year of 1979 had seen executions of leaders in the Shah’s military and government, and in November, 1979, the seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Teheran, the U.S. having been identified by Khomeini as the “Great Satan” and the enemy of all Iranians. Fifty-two embassy employees were taken hostage and not released until President Reagan was sworn into office on January 21, 1981.
SALT II: response to opposing arguments, 34432
34430; 34431; 34432; December 4, 1979; Muskie makes a comprehensive floor statement on the occasion of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reporting the SALT II treaty to the Senate, an action he supported as a committee member. He says the only valid question is whether this treaty will enhance the national security of the U.S., and argues that he believes it will, in part by reducing the incentives for a costly and endless arms race between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.
Dept. of Defense: making appropriations (H.R. 5359), conference report, 35921
35921; December 13, 1979; Muskie makes a brief comment, confirming that the conference report on the Defense Department bill, H.R.5359, is within budgetary guidelines, and complimenting the Chairman of the Committee for maintaining that discipline.
Letter: UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, to Elliot L. Richardson, by, 36039, 36045
Deep Seabed Mineral Resources Act: enact (S. 493), 36045, 36046
36039; During debate on the Deep Seabed Mineral Resources Act, McClure (R-Idaho) talks about the shortcomings he sees in the shaping of the Law of the Sea treaties under negotiation, and illustrates some of his comments with a letter to Elliot Richardson, the U.S. Ambassador to the negotiations, which is the same letter discussed, below, by Muskie.
36045, 36046; December 14, 1979; Muskie makes a statement during consideration of the Deep Seabed Mineral Resources Act, S. 493, emphasizing that passage of the bill does not prejudge the Senate’s future approval of a Law of the Sea Treaty, and that the signature of a single executive branch employee on a treaty draft in no way obligates the Senate to accept or reject such a Treaty. A mild flurry of interest had greeted remarks by the U.S. Ambassador to the Law of the Sea Conference to the effect that a signature to a treaty imposed no obligation except to refrain from actions that might defeat the purpose of the treaty. Some had interpreted these words, which echo a phrase used in the Vienna Convention on Treaties, to which the U.S. is not a signatory, as perhaps creating a legal bar to enactment of the Deep Seabed Minerals Act.
Moslems: assistance in release of Americans held hostage in Iran (see S. Res. 315), 36267
36267; December 15, 1979; Muskie is shown as one of the Senators cosponsoring S. Res. 315, a sense of the Senate resolution urging Moslems worldwide to urge their coreligionists to release the American hostages in Tehran, and to allow them to freely practice their religion. Warner (R-Virginia) says he conceived this resolution at a Senate Prayer Breakfast, and with the onset of Christmas, believes it is timely. The resolution was adopted 90-0.
Arms control, by, 36738
36738; December 18, 1979; McGovern (D-South Dakota) reproduces the text of a Muskie speech in Bangor, Maine, to the Arms Limitation Conference, in which he makes the point that unless those who want to see the arms race reduced undertake to argue on all fronts, including the military one, they will continue to lose the argument against those who advocate more and bigger weapons.
Tehran: support of administration policy regarding U.S. hostages (see S. Res. 318), 37386
37386; December 20, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of a Senate resolution, S. Res. 318, reiterating the body’s full support for the President’s efforts to resolve the hostage crisis by economic sanctions if necessary. One of the purposes of the resolution was to reaffirm that the momentary end of the session did not mean the Senate could not return on a day’s notice to take further action.
Letter: Iranian crisis, Marion Smith, 37593
Tehran: U.S. Embassy personnel held hostage, 37593
Unity Day: observance, 37593
37593; December 20, 1979; Muskie shares a letter sent to the Iranian government’s representatives from two of his constituents, urging that the country give up the hostages and return them to the United States.
HUMAN RESOURCES PROGRAMS
1979; 96th Congress, 1st Session
Health professionals: President's rescission of budget authority (H.R. 2439), 4984, 4985, 4987
Analysis: Health Resources — Rescission of Budget Authority, CBO, 4985-4987
Budget authority: rescission (H.R. 2439), 4984, 4985,4987
Message: Rescission of Budget Authority, President Carter, 4985
4984, 4985, 4987; March 14, 1979; During debate on H.R. 2493, a bill rescinding appropriated funds for the institutional costs of health care professionals’ education, Muskie argues that the rescission is needed, and provides the opinion of the Congressional Budget Office on the matter and then debates with Johnston (D-Louisiana) whether a smaller rescission is technically subject to a point of order under the terms of the budget act.
Essay: Ramp Is a Step Ahead, Lisa Flanagan, 5286
Flanagan, Lisa: tribute, 5286
Physically handicapped: Maine's Ability Counts contest, 5286
5286; March 15, 1979; Muskie says that a student from Deering High School has won Maine’s annual contest sponsored by the Governor’s Committee on Employment of the Handicapped, and commends it to his colleagues.
Letter: Dept. of Education, by, 8931
8931; April 30, 1979; During debate on S. 210, a bill to establish a cabinet-level Department of Education, Ribicoff (D-Connecticut) produces a Muskie letter laying out his objections to the proposal contained in an amendment, to sunset the entire Education Department after a period of years. Muskie’s letter suggests that sunsetting the department, rather than reexamining the programs, which is what sunset legislation would do, would lead to an incoherent situation in which an administrative structure would be abolished, but its functions would somehow have to be maintained.
Letter: Supplemental food program authorization: by, 12292
12292; May 22, 1979; When Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) produces the amendments he intends to offer on the Women’s, Infants and Children’s feeding program, S. 292, one of the documents that back up his argument is a letter from Muskie and himself alerting other Senators to these amendments.
Veterans: extend and revise program of grants to State homes (S. 1039), 15167, 15168
15167, 15168; June 18, 1979; During debate on S. 1039, a bill authorizing states’ grants for veterans services, Muskie makes the argument against a proposal to return $38 million in spending that the Veterans Committee has cut from these grants by saying that if the goal is a balanced budget, then secondary priorities must yield to first-place priorities in spending, even for programs that are generally deserving of support.
Food stamp program: appropriations, 16328
Letter: Food stamp program, CBO Director Rivlin, 16328
16238; June 25, 1979; Muskie opposes a proposal to cut food stamp funding in the supplemental appropriations bill, because uncertainties about participation rates and altered program eligibility coupled with uncertainty of the economic conditions overall make it likely that the program will require rather more spending than less. Programs for which eligibility is based on financial factors see increased usage in the face of higher unemployment and decreased usage in period of high employment, so program costs are always subject to variability, and must be estimated at the beginning of each fiscal year.
Depts. of Labor, HEW, and related agencies: scheduling debate on H.R. 4389, 19206, 19207
19206, 19207; July 18, 1979; Muskie and several other colleagues seek to reach agreement which will accommodate Stevens (R-Alaska) and Muskie on an export bill, pending the Senate’s reversion to debate on the appropriations bill for the Departments of Labor and Health, Education and Welfare, H.R. 4389.
Special milk program: budget reduction, 19210
19210; July 18, 1979; In the course of debate on H.R. 4387, the agriculture appropriations bill, Muskie supports a Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) amendment to reduce the federal subsidy for the "Special Milk Program" in public schools. The program was a major subsidy to dairy producers, as it took additional fresh milk out of the market, and over time had expanded to be available in schools with other subsidized meal services, in which instances it became a duplication of the subsidized milk generally available with the meal service. Five Administrations consecutively had proposed eliminating it entirely.
Depts. of Labor, HEW, and related agencies: appropriations (H.R. 4389), 19770-19774, 19776-19779,19814,19815
Economic Situation CBO Director Rivlin (sundry), 19773
19770-19774, 19776-19779; July 20, 1979; During debate on the appropriations for the Departments of Labor and Health, Education and Welfare, Muskie endorses a Chiles (D-Florida) amendment which would provide for a further reduction in public service employment under the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, on the grounds that the unemployed need more training than simply make-work jobs, an endorsement that culminates in a lengthy and at times heated discussion of the relative roles of the Appropriations and Budget Committees and related matters.
19814; July 20, 1979; The debate about budget assumptions and the Appropriations Committee role continues, as a colloquy which was supposed to help settle the matter degenerates somewhat into a generalized complaint against the Budget Committee staff.
Food stamp program: increase appropriations (S. 1309), 20195
20195; July 23, 1979; Muskie speaks in support of the Magnuson-McGovern amendment to S. 1309, a bill raising the budget ceiling on food stamp costs. He points out that when that ceiling was enacted, food price inflation was factored at an annual rate of 3 to 4 percent, whereas in the prior two years, it has been more like 22 percent, and combined with the altered eligibility guidelines has made it evident that more must be allocated to food stamps if they are to serve the goal of alleviating hunger low income households.
District of Columbia: appropriations (H.R. 4580), 21081, 21082
21081, 21082; July 27, 1979; Muskie makes a short comment on H.R. 4580, the appropriations bill for the District of Columbia, noting that it has been reported at levels somewhat under the budgetary allowance, and asserting that he will vote in favor of it.
Dept. of Treasury, Executive Office of the President, Postal Service, and certain agencies; appropriations (H.R. 4393), 22885, 22886, 22922, 22923
Private schools: contribution, 22922
Letter: IRS regulations on tax-exempt private schools, by (1978), 22922
IRS: implementation of rules on private schools discriminatory policies, 22922, 22923
Private schools: IRS regulations regarding tax-exempt status, 22922, 22923
Bangor Christian School, Maine: tribute, 22922
22885, 22886; September 5, 1979; Muskie comments on H.R. 4393, the Treasury appropriation for fiscal 1980, noting that the bill as reported is below the budget level, but that certain mandatory payments, primarily the federal pay raise, mean there is not much additional space in this appropriation for other spending.
22922, 22923; September 5, 1979; Muskie speaks in favor of a Javits (R-New York) amendment to delete language in the bill which would have the effect of barring the Internal Revenue Service from denying tax exempt status on white-flight schools, saying he has written the Service about the breadth of its proposed regulations, and that the new regulations issued meet his concerns and that the principle of nondiscrimination is involved, as well as the principle of free religious expression.
Letter: Social services grants, exchange with Dept. of HEW, 29521
29521; October 25, 1979; Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) expresses his frustration that the Title XX social services program duplicates many of the programs offered by the Older Americans Act, and that a requested report on this situation has still not reached Congress, although it was promised by mid-June. He includes an exchange of letters, of which Muskie, as Budget Committee Chairman is one of the authors.
Veterans: disability compensation and survivors' benefits (H.R. 2282), 32598
32598; November 15, 1979; Muskie speaks in support of a 9.9 percent increase in veterans’ disability compensation, in lieu of the 8.3 percent the House had recommended, and which gave disabled veterans a benefits increase at the same level as that granted to Social Security and Supplemental Security Income recipients, and also fell within budget spending limits.
National Capital Transportation Act: rapid transit funds (H.R. 3951), 37379
Washington metropolitan area: rapid transit funds (H.R. 3951), 37379
37379; December 20, 1979; Muskie expresses his support for H.R. 3951, a bill that converts what was a federal loan guarantee to the area’s Metrorail system to a system of grants so that the Metro authority can repay its debt in increments by 2014, saying that although the conversion of loan guarantees to outright grants is troubling, the bill does not provide operational subsidies and thus avoids creating a federal obligation that could mount in later years.
FEDERALISM, INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
1979 96th Congress, 1st Session
Government programs: periodic authorizations of new budget authority (see S. 2), 161
161; January 15, 1979; Notice only of Muskie’s reintroduction of S. 2, the Sunset Act, a bill he had strongly pushed for several years and which passed the Senate in the 95th Congress, but was not taken up by the House before adjournment.
Government programs: periodic evaluation and authorizations of new budget authority (S. 2), 167
Sunset Act: systematic review and reauthorization of Government programs (S. 2), 167
Text: S. 2, Sunset Act, 167-175
167-175; January 15, 1979; Muskie makes his introductory statement on S. 2, the Sunset Act, stressing that it will not dictate how any committee reviews its programs, but rather that the fact of being required to review them at all will help in the process of weeding out duplication and redundancy in operations and streamline the government functions that are broadly supported. Muskie came to his beliefs about the need for a mechanism to clean the federal stables as he realized, through his Budget Committee work, that much of the federal budget was spoken for by actions of Congresses long past, and that as a result, the annual budgeting process was more an accounting procedure than a policy debate. With the bulk of federal revenues already spoken for,
each Congress could make only minimal shifts in budget priorities each year, a situation he saw as growing worse over time, even as public demands for expansion of services and new programs kept growing.
Employment: antirecession fiscal assistance to local government (see S. 200), 1466
1466; January 31, 1979; Danforth asks that Muskie be shown as a cosponsor on S. 200, a bill providing aid to local governments with unemployment over 6 percent, when the national rate of unemployment fell below 6 percent, a measure that was enacted the previous year by the Senate, but never considered in the House.
Courts: presumption over validity of agency regulations, 23488
Federal agencies: court presumption regarding validity of regulations, 23488
Courts: improvements in the structure and administration (S. 1477), 23488, 23489
23488, 23489; September 7, 1979; Muskie speaks on a proposal offered by Bumpers (D-Arkansas) to a court improvement bill, S. 1477, which would have the practical effect of granting federal courts a virtually limitless review of agency regulations, reversing the burden of proof carried by those who dispute an agency’s rules and instead requiring the agency to demonstrate that it has acted within the limits of the statute law.
Lobbying activities: public disclosure (see S. 1782), 25485
25485; September 20, 1979; Muskie is shown as an original sponsor of S. 1782, a Mathias (R-Maryland) bill to provide for limited disclosure of lobbying costs, and identification of individuals engaged in direct contact with members of Congress and staff in efforts to solicit or affect legislative action.
Joint Funding Simplification Act: extend (see S. 1835), 26719
26719; September 28, 1979; Muskie is shown as one of the principal sponsors of S. 1835, a Sasser (D-Tennessee) bill to extend the authorization of the Joint Funding Simplification Act, a measure which Muskie originally wrote and which provides for state and local governments to use a single grant application even if they are requesting funds from more than one program. It was a measure Muskie originally developed as a means of streamlining grant applications and program operations. Sasser sponsored it in 1979 because, owing to the Committee reforms passed in 1978, Muskie was forced to drop his membership on the Government Operations Committee in order to take a vacant seat on the Foreign Relations Committee. Bills are routinely sponsored by Committee members to speed and simplify the enactment process.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, CIVIL LAW, CRIMINAL LAW
1979; 96th Congress, 1st Session
Constitutional Amendments to Balance the Budget, National Press Club, by, 2587-2589
February 15, 1979; In the House of Representatives, Congressman Brademas (D-Indiana) offers a text of the remarks Muskie made to the National Press Club about the various budget-balancing proposed Constitutional amendments then being touted as the way to cut back spending.
Constitutional Amendment to Require a Balanced Budget, Senator Culver, 4227
4227; March 7, 1979; Muskie mentions a recent Culver (D-Iowa) speech on the balanced budget and recommends it to his colleagues, providing the text.
Constitutional Restraints on Federal Spending: Walter W. Heller, 4443-4445
Constitutional Restraints on Federal Spending: Alan Greenspan, 4445
Table: Postwar growth of major forms of debt (selected data), 4444
4443-4445; March 8, 1979; Muskie notes that although on economic policy the views of Alan Greenspan and Walter Heller differ substantially, both economists oppose the simple-minded approach of mandating a balanced federal budget by means of an amendment to the Constitution, and sets out the testimony they gave before the Budget Committee in which they discuss the difficulties of definitions, estimates and other uncertainties in budgetary prediction which combine to make this an unwise approach.
Memorandum: Constitutional Restraints on Federal Spending: Committee on Budget (Senate), 4452, 4460
Memorandum: Constitutional Restraints on Federal Spending: Library of Congress, 4454-4460
4451-4460; March 8, 1979; In response to the flurry of proposals at the beginning of the Congress, all of which sought to limit federal spending in some way or to require a balanced federal budget, Muskie produces a memo from the Budget Committee staff setting forth the varied and extensively different proposals, which range from State resolutions calling for a Constitutional Convention, to legislation proposed in the Senate by individual members, and an extensive discussion of constitutionally required fiscal arrangements prepared by the Congressional Research Service. The increased attention to balanced budgets and spending limitations stemmed in large part from political calculations in the runup to the 1980 presidential election, although the successful candidate in that race, President Reagan, at no time during his eight years in office produced even the semblance of a balanced budget.
LEAA: improving assistance to State and local governments (S. 241), 11846
11846; May 21, 1979; Muskie comments on S. 241, the authorization for the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, and notes that although the Senate explicitly rejected an increase in the agency’s funding during the recent budget debate, the authorization nonetheless provides for a substantial increase over what that budget can accommodate, and warns his colleagues that if they wish to stay within the budget, they will have to be prepared to see far lower appropriations levels in the funding bill.
Dept. of Justice: appropriations (S. 1157), 13233
13233; June 4, 1979; Muskie comments on the authorization for the Department of Justice bill, S. 1157, noting that he anticipates that it will not be granted its total appropriation by the Appropriations Committee, with which proviso he intends to vote for it.
President: constitutional amendment on direct popular election (S.J. Res. 28), 17532-17534, 17764, 17765
Budget: constitutional amendment on a balanced, 17532-17534
Vote for the Federal President, New York Times, 17765
17532; July 9, 1979; Muskie makes his arguments against a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget, setting out the impracticality of such a change and the fact that the budget resolution adopted by the Congress in May provides for a balanced budget in Fiscal Year 1981, in a rational and attainable manner. Although the issue on the Senate floor at the time was a proposed Constitutional amendment to provide for the direct election of Presidents, in effect abolishing the Electoral College system of weighted voting, it was widely expected that a balanced budget Constitutional amendment proposal would be offered to the underlying resolution.
17764; July 10, 1979; Muskie speaks against the adoption of a Constitutional amendment to provide for the direct election of the President, remarking that with two proposed Constitutional amendments already before the states, it is not a good time to be passing on a third proposal. The two proposals then before the states were ultimately not ratified. One was representation for the people living in the District of Columbia, and the other was the Equal Rights Amendment, barring sex discrimination.
MISCELLANEOUS
1979 96th Congress, 1st Session
King, Martin L., Jr.: designate birthday as legal holiday (see S. 25), 1321
1321; January 29, 1979; Bayh (D-Indiana) requests that Muskie’s name be added as a cosponsor of S. 25, a bill to designate the birthday of Martin Luther King Jr., as an annual national holiday.
Rockefeller, Nelson A.: eulogy, 1469
Rockefeller Loss Affects Maine Town, John Halvorsen, Portland (Maine) Press Herald, 1469
Death of a Mainer, Portland (Maine) Press Herald, 1470
Islanders Remember Rocky's Generosity, Portland (Maine) Press Herald, 1470
1469, 1470; January 31, 1978; Muskie comments on the sense of loss felt by the residents of one Maine town at the death of Nelson Rockefeller, who was born at his father’s house in Seal Harbor, Maine. Rockefeller served as Vice President to President Ford, but was dropped from Ford’s reelection ticket at the insistence of conservative Republicans. He died in New York City on January 26, 1979.
Memorial service for Nelson A. Rockefeller, 1690
1690; February 1, 1979; Muskie is named as one of the members of a Senate committee formed to attend the memorial service for Nelson Rockefeller, former Vice President.
Bartlett, Dewey F.: eulogy, 4221
4221; March 7, 1979; Muskie makes a very brief statement in remembrance of former Senator Dewey F. Bartlett of Oklahoma, who retired from the Senate at the end of the 95th Congress and succumbed to his cancer not long afterwards.
Mitchell, Clarence M., Jr.: tribute (see S. Res. 104), 4996
4996; March 14, 1979; Muskie, along with most of his colleagues, is shown as one of the cosponsors of S. Res. 104, a resolution commending Clarence Mitchell for his work as Director of the Washington Bureau of the NAACP, Legislative Chairman of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, as the U.S. Representative to the Seventh Special Session of the United Nations, and the thirtieth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations on the occasion of his retirement from the NAACP.
8549; April 25, 1979; As the Senate moved to take up the first concurrent budget resolution, Muskie joined Lugar (R-Indiana) in paying tribute on the death of Marvella Bayh, wife of the Democratic Senator from Indiana.
Poem: Impressions of Kennebunkport, Maine, Dagny Hess, Brooklyn (N.Y.) Star, 11320
Kennebunkport, Maine: tribute, 11320
11320; May 15, 1979; Muskie says that the author of what he calls a "prose poem" has written about Kennebunkport, which is one of his most favored places in Maine, and he produces the poem itself.
Cundys Harbor, Maine: D.C. memorial erected by Camp Fire Girls (see S.J. Res. 83), 12825
12825; May 24, 1979; Notice only of Muskie’s introduction of S.J. Res. 83, a resolution to authorize the Camp Fire Girls of Cundys Harbor, Maine, to erect a memorial on Maine Avenue in the District of Columbia.
Historical facts: Harpswell's statue of Maine Lobsterman, 12849-12851
Maine fishermen: D.C. memorial erected by Cundys Harbor (Maine) Camp Fire Girls (S.J. Res. 83), 12849
Cundy's Harbor, Maine: D.C. memorial erected by Camp Fire Girls (S.J. Res. 83), 12849
12849: May 24, 1979; Muskie, on behalf of himself and Cohen (R-Maine) introduces S.J. Res. 83, a resolution allowing for the erection of a statue of a fisherman on Maine Avenue in Washington D.C., and explains that although this permission was received in 1962, the state failed to allocate money for the purpose, and he provides historical background on the statue, its creator, its model and the casting process.
Strider, Robert E.: tribute, 14618
Colby College, Waterville, Maine: Robert E. Lee Strider contribution, 14618
Robert E. Lee Strider, Lloyd Ferris, Portland (Maine) Telegram, 14619
14618, 14619; June 13, 1979; Muskie notes that retiring President of Colby College, Robert E. Lee Strider, has helped him with a judgeship selection process, as well as contributing to Maine’s educational community during his 19 years at Colby.
Five Faces of Maine, Peter Anderson, Boston Globe, 27625-27631
Maine: problems and possibilities, 27625
27625-27631; October 10, 1979; Muskie takes note of an article in the Boston Globe which takes a thorough look at the state of Maine, from the deep forests of the north to the fishermen on the coasts, and notes that Cohen (R-Maine) joins him in recommending the article as a good introduction to the state.
Church, Senator: tribute, 27863
Legacy of Lee Metcalf, Dale A. Burk, Living Wilderness (publication), 27863-27865
Lee Metcalf Stood for Stewardship, Senator Church, Living Wilderness (publication), 27865
Metcalf Role in Forest Reform, Arnold W. Bolle, Living Wilderness (publication), 27865
Intimate Side of a Senator, Teddy Roe, Living Wilderness (publication), 27866
27863-27865, 27866; October 11, 1979; Muskie shares a number of articles describing the work of the late Senator Lee Metcalf of Montana, who, prior to his death, had been one of the Senate’s outstanding leaders on natural resource preservation issues, and on a personal level, was a friend of Muskie’s as well.
Maine Lobsterman: copy of statue placed in District of Columbia by Camp Fire Girls, 28314
28314; October 15, 1979; Muskie and Cohen (R-Maine) jointly speak in favor of Senate passage of the resolution they earlier introduced to authorize the erection of the lobsterman statue on public land in the District of Columbia, and the resolution is passed on a voice vote. The preliminary step of approving the resolution was a necessary precondition to gaining the approval of the Interior Department and local agencies charged with preserving the public areas of the city.
Kreps, Juanita: tribute, 30141
Sec. of Commerce: tribute, 30141
30141; October 30, 1979; When Juanita Kreps, the Secretary of Commerce, announced her resignation from the Cabinet at the end of October, 1979, Muskie made a brief statement expressing his appreciation of her work in connection with Maine fisheries’ marketing. Ms. Kreps resigned for personal reasons, her husband having attempted suicide in June, 1979. She was at the time the sixth Cabinet member to leave the Carter Administration.
Jim Hannah Doesn't Like Santa Claus, Alice T. Larkin, Maine Times, 37566
37566; December 20, 1979; Muskie says some of the residents of Boothbay, in Maine, have shown what the Christmas spirit really is, by their work on toy donations for the season.
POLITICS, CAMPAIGN REFORM
1979 96TH Congress, 1st Session
Greatest of Great Speakers, Margaret W. Reid, 2453
Mr. Sam — ‘Fur’ Piece From Flag Springs, William D. Bedell, 2453
Sam Rayburn Library, Bonham, Tex.: printing of autobiography of late House Speaker, 2453
Rayburn, Sam: release of "Speak, Mr. Speaker", 2453
Book review: "Speak, Mr. Speaker," William D. Bedell and Margaret W. Reid, 2453
Letter: Release of "Speak, Mr. Speaker," H.G. Dulaney, 2454
2453-2454; February 9, 1979; Muskie pays tribute to the work of the Sam Rayburn Library in Bonham, Texas, which has published a chronological series of the former Speaker’s statements, letters, and other recorded comments in the form of an "autobiography" and had asked Muskie to mention the work in the Senate.
Randolph, Senator: tribute, 36522
Senator Randolph's Timely Warning, Wheeling (W. Va.) News-Register, 36522
36522; December 17, 1979; Muskie notes that an editorial in one of his state’s papers has accurately depicted the influence and thoughtfulness of Jennings Randolph (D-West Virginia) who is warning Americans about the implications of the decline in voting.
SENATE RULES, PROCEDURES, ASSIGNMENTS, HOUSEKEEPING
1979; 96th Congress, 1st Session
728; January 23, 1979; Byrd (D-West Virginia) calls up a resolution listing the membership of the various Senate committees, and Muskie’s name appears as a member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, the Foreign Relations Committee, and Chairman of the Budget Committee. This is a routine publication of committee memberships at the beginning of each new Congress. There is no Muskie text.
Senate Standing Rule XXII (Precedence of motions): amend (S. Res. 61), 2382-2384
Filibuster: amending Senate rule on cloture vote, 2382-2384
2382-2384; February 9, 1979; During debate on S. Res. 61, a resolution modifying the Senate’s rules of precedence for motions made in connection with Rule 22, the filibuster rule, Muskie speaks in support of the effort to reorganize the post-cloture debate procedure in the Senate so as to bring to an end what had by this time become the post-cloture filibuster, a means of using procedural rules and motions to continue to thwart the final vote on an issue.
3036; February 22, 1979; At the close of debate on S. Res. 61, amending the Senate’s filibuster rule, Byrd (D-West Virginia) thanks a number of Senators who were instrumental in helping pass the resolution, and who served on the Ad Hoc Committee on Rules which he set up, including Muskie, who was a member of that Committee.
Senate: privilege of the floor, 8550, 8552, 12398, 18914, 23488, 24338, 24781, 25475, 27043, 31238, 32962
Under Senate rules, no action can be taken unless it is by the unanimous consent of all Senators, which means that even routine and trivial requests, such as allowing a particular member of the staff to be in the chamber during a debate and votes must be made as a formal request and not be challenged by any other member. As a result, members who are active in debates and want to have staff available make many such requests throughout the year.
8550; April 25, 1979; During debate on the first budget resolution, Muskie asks that Bill Hoagland be granted the privilege of the floor.
8552; April 25, 1979; Muskie asks that two Agriculture Committee staffers be granted floor privileges for a debate on an amendment to the first budget resolution.
23488; September 7, 1979; Muskie asks that staff of the Environment and Public Works Committee be granted the privileges of the floor during debate on a Bumpers (D-Arkansas) amendment to S. 1477, a court improvement bill.
24338; September 13, 1979; Muskie asks that Mike Aube of his staff be granted the privileges of the floor during debate on S. 14, the Reclamation Reform Act, a bill to conform reclamation law to current farm practices.
24781; September 17, 1979; At the opening of the debate on the second budget resolution, S. Con. Res. 36, Muskie asks that a lengthy list of Budget Committee staff be granted the privileges of the floor during debate.
25475; September 20, 1979; During debate on S. 480, authorizing appropriations for water resources planning, Muskie asks that Jim Case of his staff be granted the privileges of the floor.
27043; October 2, 1979; Calling up S. Res. 244, a budget act waiver to allow consideration of S. 1308, the bill authorizing the Energy Mobilization Board, Muskie asks that Karl Braithwaite
and Charlene Sturbitts of the Environment and Public Works Committee be granted the privileges of the floor.
31238; November 7, 1979; When the Senate takes up the conference report on S. Con. Res. 36, Muskie asks consent for a number of Budget Committee staff members to be granted the privilege of the floor during debate and votes.
32962; November 16, 1979; As the Senate prepares to pass S. Con. Res. 53, an original budget resolution covering the years 1980, 1981 and 1982, Muskie requests that a number of Budget Committee staff members be granted the privilege of the floor.
Committees: permission to meet, 8674, 12440
8674; April 15, 1979; Muskie makes a routine request that the Subcommittee on Regional and Community Development be allowed to meet to on the extension of public works programs.
12240; May 23, 1979; Muskie makes a routine request that the Committee on Commerce may meet during the session of the Senate on the potential bankruptcy of the Milwaukee Railroad.
Senate: August recess (H. Con. Res. 168), 21449
August recess: providing for (H. Con. Res. 168), 21449
21449; July 31, 1980; As Byrd (D-West Virginia) prepares to call up the adjournment resolution for the August recess, Weicker (R-Connecticut) offers an amendment eliminating the August recess and providing recess for a long weekend over Labor Day, and in the successive discussion, Muskie and some of the other committee chairmen join in, pointing out the limitations of what could be accomplished even with every member in Washington through August. Fifteen days earlier, on July 15, Carter had given what became known as his “malaise” speech, although he never used the term. Prior to that, he had spent two weeks at Camp David interviewing a wide range of persons, including former Cabinet members, Members of Congress, and others, to seek a new direction for his administration, and he announced a number of ambitious goals in terms of cutting back on oil imports, rationing of gasoline, and a new emphasis on developing alternative fuels and on conservation. Weicker’s claim was that the government had more or less come to a halt for several weeks while this process worked itself out, and that to cope with the President’s new energy program, Congress should stay in session and work through August.
Commission for a National Agenda for the Eighties, 32328
32328; November 14, 1979; Muskie, along with various colleagues, is appointed to serve on the President’s Commission for a National Agenda for the Eighties.
TAXES, FISCAL POLICY, BUDGET
1979; 96th Congress, 1st Session
Report: Committee on Budget, 2395, 7674, 8258, 10211, 10442, 11587, 12823, 14855, 19234, 19471, 20547, 21479, 25266, 26284, 26984, 28314, 29951, 31033, 31257,32609,35370,37500
The budget act’s provisions attempted to establish a firm calendar for Congressional action, by limiting the period of time during which bills to authorize new spending could be reported and acted upon. Not surprisingly, this firm calendar failed to gain total acquiescence from Senators and their Committees, as a result of which, waivers of the budget act were frequently sought and frequently granted, albeit under protest from Muskie.
2395; February 9, 1979; Muskie reports S. Res. 73, an original resolution authorizing spending by the Budget Committee for inquiries and investigations.
7674; April 9, 1979; Muskie reports S. Res. 125, an original resolution waiving section 303(a) of the budget act to allow for consideration of S. 413, the Airport Noise and Safety legislation.
8258; April 23, 1979; Muskie reports S. Con. Res. 22, an original resolution setting out the congressional budget for the years 1980, 1981, and 1982, and revising the second concurrent resolution for Fiscal Year 1979; Report No. 96-68, and another resolution, S. Con. Res. 23, for the same purposes.
10211; May 8, 1979; Muskie reports S. Res. 146, waiving Section 402(a) of the budget act to allow for the consideration of S. 1007, a bill providing supplemental security assistance for fiscal year 1979 in support of Egypt and Israel; Res. 147, waiving the same section to allow for consideration of S. 586, appropriations for the State Department and associated independent agencies.
10442; May 9, 1979; Muskie reports S. Res. 141, a resolution waiving Section 402(a) of the budget act to allow for consideration of S. 239, the Domestic Volunteer Service Act Amendments of 1979.
11587; May 16, 1979; Byrd (D-West Virginia) on behalf of Muskie, reports S. Res. 157, waiving Section 402(a) of the budget act to allow consideration of H.R. 1787, a supplemental bill for NASA, and S. Res. 159, waiving the same section of the budget act to allow consideration of S. 584, the Foreign Assistance and Arms Export Control Act.
12823; May 24, 1979; Byrd (D-West Virginia) on behalf of Muskie, reports S. Res. 160, a resolution waiving Section 402(a) of the budget act to permit consideration of S. 905, funding the Temporary Commission on Financial Oversight of the District of Columbia.
14855; June 14, 1979; Muskie reports two resolutions, S. Res. 181 and S. Res. 182, both waiving Section 402(a) of the budget act to permit consideration of H.R. 1786, the NASA authorization, and S. 1319, the military construction bill, respectively.
19234; July 18, 1979; Muskie reports S. Res. 195, waiving the budget act to allow consideration of S. 1309, an increase in the authorization for the food stamp program.
19471; July 19, 1979; Muskie reports unfavorably S. Res. 190, to permit consideration of S. 688, a bill authorizing the civilian programs of the Department of Energy for Fiscal Years 1981 and 1982. He notes that the Budget Committee’s unfavorable report is due to the fact that the Congress is waiting for anticipated requests for funding the full energy program from the Administration.
20547; July 25, 1979; S. Res. 204, an original resolution increasing the spending authorized by the Budget Committee, and S. Res. 202, waiving Section 402(a) of the budget act in order to allow consideration of H.R. 111, to authorize operation and maintenance of the Panama Canal and to fulfil obligations under the Panama Canal Treaty of 1977.
21479; July 31, 1979; Muskie reports three resolutions, S. Res. 200 to allow consideration of S. 1125, a bill expanding the crop insurance program, and S. Res. 212, to allow consideration of S. 914, a public works bill, and S. Res. 213, to allow consideration of S. 566, the anti-recession bill granting money to local governments.
25266; September 19, 1979; Muskie reports two resolutions, S. Res. 217, to allow for consideration of S. 1110, dealing with mailing rates for children’s publications, and S. 218, allowing consideration of H.R. 3923, extending the National Historical Publications and Records Commission.
26284; September 26, 1979; Muskie reports two resolutions, S. Res. 240, allowing consideration of H.R. 3354, a bill dealing with petroleum reserves, and S. Res. 242, allowing consideration of S.1396, the child support program.
26984; October 1, 1979; Jackson (D-Washington) reports S. Res. 244, allowing consideration of S. 1308, the bill authorizing the Energy Mobilization Board, an effort to bypass regulations and laws which could impede the development of synthetic fuels.
28314; October 15, 1979; A joint resolution, S. J. Res. 83, permitting for the erection of a statue of a Maine lobsterman is reported and passed on the Senate floor. Muskie and Cohen (R-Maine) cosponsored this, but it is unclear why it is shown in this listing of Budget Committee reports, except by error.
29951; October 29, 1979; Muskie reports a succession of budget act waiver resolutions: S. Res. 232, to allow consideration of S. 1716, the Solar Energy Development Bank, S. Res. 234, with respect to S. 1748, a bill authorizing below-market loans for energy conservation in residential and commercial properties; S. Res. 254, for H.R. 5218, the Caribbean Hurricane Relief Act, S. Res. 257 for S. 1012, U.S. participation in the International Energy Exposition in Knoxville, Tennessee, S. Res. 258, for S. 1668, additional funding for migration and refugee assistance, and S. Res. 263 for S. 493, the Deep Ocean Seabed Mining bill.
32609; November 15, 1979; Muskie reports S. Res. 269, a resolution waiving section 402(a) of the budget act to allow for consideration of H.R. 1543, the Adjustment and Assistance Program of the Trade Act.
35370; December 11, 1979; Muskie reports three resolutions, two waiving section 303(a) of the budget act: S. Res. 288 in respect of S. 1648, improving airports and airways, and S. Res. 300 in respect of H.R. 3398, increasing target prices for wheat and other grain crops, along with S. Res. 303, waiving section 402(a) in respect of s. 2094, authorizing loan guarantees for the Chrysler Corporation.
37500; December 20, 1979; Muskie reports two section 402(a) waivers, S. Res. 317 in respect of S. 523, revising pay schedules for military physicians, and S. Res. 309 in respect of H.R. 5537, amending the borrowing authority of the District of Columbia.
Committee on Budget: additional expenditures (see S. Res. 73, 20556), 2443, 20556
2443; February 9, 1979; Muskie reports a resolution, S. Res. 73, which authorizes spending from the Senate contingency fund by the Budget Committee.
20556; July 25, 1979; Muskie reports a resolution, S. Res. 204, to raise the limits on spending by the Budget Committee from the original $80,000 to $160,000 for the purpose of hiring consultants, and $5000 for the purpose of professional staff training.
First concurrent resolution on the budget: printing of report (see S. Res. 84), 3699
3699; March 1, 1979; Muskie introduces S. Res. 84, a resolution to authorize the printing of 1000 copies of the first budget resolution for the use of the Budget Committee.
Rules: Committee on the Budget, 3725
3725; March 1, 1979; The standing rules of procedure under which the Budget Committee functions are reproduced in the Record, with the added notation that proxy votes may not be cast in the first round of votes to determine budget spending levels.
Committee on Budget: notice of hearing, 4440, 16902
4440; March 8, 1979; Muskie announces a series of Budget Committee hearings on the first concurrent budget resolution and provides a schedule of witnesses for those hearings.
16902; June 27, 1979; Muskie announces a series of Budget Committee hearings for July, on the second concurrent budget resolution, and notes that an October series is expected, for which the schedule will be produced later.
Public debt: extending limit (H.R. 2534), 6004, 6061-6064, 6066, 6067-6069
Public debt: extending limit (H.R. 2534), 6058, 6131
6004; March 22, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of a Long (D-Louisiana) amendment No. 116, to H.R. 2534, the debt limit bill.
6058; March 22, 1979; When Long calls up his amendment during debate on H.R. 2534, Muskie is again shown as a cosponsor, and as the debate on Long’s amendment continues, takes part in the discussion, which is primarily about alternative mechanisms to force a balanced budget to emerge. Muskie’s own views on budget balancing were considerably more nuanced than those of many balanced budget supporters, because he understood that definitions of income and outgo as well as actual appropriation of funds and the rate at which funds were spent were all matters that could show budget balance by manipulation. The Senate was then facing a Dole (R-Kansas) –Armstrong (R-Colorado) amendment that would require a two-thirds vote to approve a budget not in balance. The Long proposal modified that approach.
6061-6064; March 22, 1979; As debate on the Long amendment continues, Muskie points out that if he is required to report a budget in balance for Fiscal 1981, the budget for Fiscal 1980 would also have to be altered so as to lead to a balance in 1981, and a discussion ensues which makes it clear that any Congress can repeal or enact any statute, including one to require a balanced budget. This fact, although self-evident, has proven particularly difficult for many Members of Congress to grasp.
6066; March 22, 1979; As a hybrid kind of amendment, consisting of both Dole and Long components is debated, Muskie answers questions about the effects of the language on the jurisdiction of the Budget Committee and on the Congressional responsibility to vote a budget resolution for every year, in every calendar year.
6067-6069; March 22, 1979; As the debate wraps up for the day, Members reach an agreement for resuming debate after the weekend, and Muskie adds his comments to the statement by Byrd (D-West Virginia) to the effect that balancing the budget will require Senators to face up to making specific cuts in named programs, rather than a feel-good broad vote in favor of something that everyone more or less supports in the abstract.
6131: March 26, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of a Long (D-Louisiana) amendment No. 111, to require the Budget Committee to report a balanced budget for 1981 by April 15, along with backup materials, essentially the same amendment Muskie had cosponsored earlier. Long explicitly noted that he had listed cosponsors from his initial amendment, without consulting them. It is possible that the balanced-budget mania of this period was as much a reaction to the Muskie personality as to the realities of accounting for an extremely complex federal government system in which spend-out rates and authority to spend were not easily corralled. It is also possible that the existence of the budget process created pressures that Congress was unwilling to deal with, regardless of the personalities involved.
Senate: legislative program, 8215, 21449
Congressional budget: setting forth for 1980-82 (S. Con. Res. 22), 8214-8221, 8228-8231, 8244-8248, 8251-8253, 8389, 8391-8393, 8395, 8397-8399, 8408, 8411-8415, 8418, 8419, 8552-8554, 8560, 8568-8571, 8578, 8579, 8581, 8582, 8584-8587, 8593, 8594, 8602-8604, 8606, 8607, 8615, 8621-8623, 8625-8632, 8635, 8639, 8640, 8642, 8647, 8636 4687
Table: Budget (selected data), 8217, 8218, 8245, 8252
Congressional budget: setting forth for 1980-82 (see S. Con. Res. 22, 23), 8258
List: Specific cuts in congressional budget (as proposed by Senator Proxmire), 8391
Bellmon, Senator: decision not to run again, 8221
Work incentive (WIN) program: funding, 8392, 8393
Food stamps: proposed reduction of budget authority, 8552-8554, 8560
Older persons: nutrition and supportive programs, 8584, 8586
LEAA: funding, 8615
Social security: funding, 8622
Food stamps: expansion dilemma, 8626, 8627
Federal employees: retirement cost-of-living adjustments, 8639
Congressional budget: order for votes on amendments to S. Con. Res. 22, 8416, 8417
Congressional budget: debate procedure for S. Con. Res. 22, 8420-8423
Federal spending: restrain growth rate, 8568-8571
Congressional budget: setting forth for 1980-82 (S. Con. Res. 22) – correction, 8640
Federal agencies: film making activities, 8606, 8607
Federal agencies: restrict use of overtime pay, 8606, 8607
Loring AFB, Maine: proposed reduction, 8228
Iran: Navy purchase of ships ordered in 1974 by, 8229, 8230, 8593, 8594
Chronology: Iranian ships – Senate Budget Committee Debate; 8231-8235,8237-8241
8214-8221; April 23, 1979; Muskie makes his opening statement on S. Con. Res. 22, a three-year budget resolution setting forth spending ceilings for Fiscal Years 1980, 1981 and 1982, as well as revised spending limits for Fiscal Year 1979 to take into account changes in inflation, interest rates and revenues affecting the 1979 budget spending limits. He notes that S. Con. Res. 23, an alternative budget resolution, has also been reported and is available to any Senator who might wish to substitute it for the pending measure. The alternative budget resolution provides for tax cuts in 1981 and a balanced budget in 1982. The Budget Committee, in reporting an alternative budget, and a balanced 1981 budget, was responding to the Senate’s mandate, passed in connection with the Debt Limit bill earlier in the year.
8228-8229; April 23, 1979; Muskie and Moynihan (D-New York) discuss the imbalance in federal spending between the Northeast-Midwest region and the South and West, a debate that was quite acrimonious at this time, as more and more military bases were relocated to the south.
8229; April 23, 1979; Riegle (D-Michigan), Moynihan and Muskie discuss the substance and meaning of a vote taken in the Budget Committee on the question of whether four ships ordered by the Shah of Iran in 1974 and at the time under construction would be funded or not. Muskie tries to make the point that the Budget Committee does not report line items, such as ships, as Riegle argues that his amendment to remove the funding is valid.
8244-8248; April 23, 1979; The debate continues as Muskie tries to explain to Riegle (D-Michigan) that a vote in the Budget Committee does not have any effect on specific weapons approved by the Armed Services and Appropriations Committees, because the Budget Committee’s votes are limited to funding figures, not to specific programs or procurements.
8251-8253; April 23, 1979; Muskie responds to a Proxmire (D-Wisconsin) proposal to make an unspecified 5 percent across-the-board cut in order to balance the budget in 1980, rather than in 1981, by pointing out that if government spending is going to be cut so far and so abruptly, the 5 percent cut becomes a 7 percent cut because one effect of lower spending is reduced revenues to the government.
8258; April 23, 1979; Muskie reports two concurrent resolutions on the budget, S. Con. Res. 22, and S. Con. Res. 23, as the Senate begins to debate the former.
8389; April 24, 1979; Muskie and Proxmire are joined by others as the debate on the Proxmire 5 percent spending cut continues, and Muskie provides a list of what Proxmire called specific cuts to make the $20 billion savings he has been urging.
8391-8393, 8395; April 24, 1979; As the debate continues, Talmadge (D-Georgia) says he is shocked that the Budget Committee proposes to eliminate the Work Incentive Program, pointing out that it save $2 for each $1 spent to move welfare dependents to private sector jobs, and points out that the House budget committee has preserved the program, and urges Muskie to be accommodating in the conference committee. Muskie notes that he was on the losing side of the Budget Committee vote on the program, and says he will bear in mind what Talmadge has said when the issue arises in conference.
8397-8399; April 24, 1979; Muskie answers a question about revenue levels in the budget resolution when Durkin (D-New Hampshire) has explained why he will not formally offer an amendment dealing with the anticipated windfall profits tax on oil, and Long (D-Louisiana) offers his perspective on the meaning of the revenue levels in the budget resolution.
8408; April 24, 1979; Muskie responds to a McGovern (D-South Dakota) amendment to transfer funds from the budget’s defense function to other domestic programs, and tries to explain how the Committee reached the defense numbers in the resolution. These so-called "transfer" amendments were a popular, although generally not successful, way to avoid adding to the deficit while still increasing spending for individuals’ favorite programs.
8411-8412; April 24, 1979; Muskie notes that the Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, Bentsen (D-Texas) will offer his perspective on the fiscal policy mapped out in the budget resolution. The Joint Economic Committee is a body comprised of House and Senate members, and is generally highly regarded for its economic analysis.
8413-8415; April 24, 1979; After discussing the way in which trust fund surpluses can offset operating deficits in the federal budget, Muskie and Harry Byrd (I-Virginia) debate Byrd’s amendment for an immediate end to countercyclical jobs programs instead of the 18-month expiration that the Budget Committee supported.
8418, 8419; April 24, 1979; In what Muskie observes has become an annual ritual, Harry Byrd (I-Virginia) offers an amendment to cut $1 billion from the foreign assistance functions of the budget, an amendment which fails on a voice vote, and Muskie and others conduct a lengthy bargaining session over the time agreements and order of procedure for further amendments on the following day.
8552-8554; April 25, 1979; Muskie responds to a proposed Lugar (R-Indiana) amendment to cut $1 billion out of the food stamp program by pointing out that the resolution’s spending limits are the result of compromise and represent spending that many individuals regard as excessive, in such areas as defense, for instance, but that cutting $1 billion from a $7 billion program is going too far.
8560; April 25, 1979; The debate over the Lugar food stamp cut continues, with Muskie making the point that the kinds of changes Lugar is seeking cannot be done through a budget resolution, but must be made by the authorizing committee, in this case, the Agriculture Committee on which Lugar serves.
8568-8571; April 25, 1979; Muskie analyzes and replies to assumptions included in the Roth (R-Delaware) amendment, which were primarily aimed at permitting the Kemp-Roth tax cut to be enacted. The Kemp-Roth tax cut was at the time the centerpiece of the Republican campaign to make the twin issues of the balanced budget and individual tax rate cuts the driving element of the forthcoming presidential election year. At this time, individual tax rates were calibrated so that even a relatively modest increase in income yielded a modest tax rate increase as well, and since the system was not adjusted for inflation, wage increases that were insufficient to maintain discretionary income levels against inflation nonetheless tended to force more and more middle income households into higher tax brackets. Through much of the decade of the 1970s, Congress responded with annual or biannual tax adjustments, but did not deal with the underlying system itself.
8578, 8579; April 25, 1979; Muskie makes the point that the Domenici (R-New Mexico) proposal to cut spending further and provide for a smaller tax cut is in all essentials the same as the earlier Roth proposal, and argues that it would not lead to a balanced budget in 1981, and that it replicates cuts the whole Senate has already voted down. His argument is that if a budget is going to work, it has to be realistic in terms of having the broad support of both Houses of the Congress.
8581, 8582; April 25, 1979; Muskie points out that a Schweiker (R-Pennsylvania) amendment designed to limit spending to no more than the rate of inflation overlooks the fact that the three-year estimates in the resolution actually provide for spending lower than inflation except in one year, and that this is because of defense spending, which will grow at a slightly faster rate, but the debate degenerates as Schweiker claims the Budget Committee will not allow any amendments. On a roll call vote, the amendment fails 40-52.
8584-8587; April 25, 1979; When Metzenbaum (D-Ohio) seeks to add $100 million to the elderly nutrition programs, Muskie reminds him that adding the money does not guarantee that it will be used for elderly nutrition rather than for something else within the general budget function, because the budget resolution does not fund specific programs and the Budget Committee does not write the funding legislation for individual programs.
8593, 8594; April 25, 1979; Muskie reiterates most of the points he made earlier in the debate in response to a Riegle (D-Michigan) amendment to target and eliminate the four Iranian ships over which the Budget Committee undertook a lengthy debate in markup. Muskie also becomes a trifle testy over the insinuation that the Committee staff in some fashion has failed to mention the ships in the Report on the budget resolution.
8602-8604; April 25, 1979; Muskie argues that a proposed Hatch (R-Utah) amendment to provide additional flexibility in the appropriations process duplicates provisions in the Budget Act which already permit Congress to alter spending plans, or with reconciliation instructions, to cancel spending plans if the need arises.
8606, 8607; April 25, 1979; In responding to another Hatch (R-Utah) amendment, Muskie reminds him that the Budget Committee is not a line item or oversight committee, and cannot cut specific sums for particular purposes as the Hatch amendment would do. Hatch proposed to cut $1 billion in federal travel, overtime pay, film making and a 1 percent reduction in work force through attrition, but failed to allocate the savings to budget functions. The Budget Committee’s mandate was limited to establishing budgetary totals, not to individual program accounts.
8615; April 25, 1979; Muskie says that the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration has failed to reduce crime or notably improve the administration of state and local justice systems as he opposes a Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) amendment to restore $100 million for this function, to allow the program to function at its prior-year funding level.
8621-8623; April 25, 1979; Muskie argues against a Chiles (D-Florida) amendment which would reduce the savings proposed in the social security program from $700 to $300, and which he says would doom the 1981 balanced budget, primarily because the specifics of that budget will be voted on in 1980, an election year, and he observes that it is extremely unlikely that Congress will vote for social security benefit reductions in an election year.
8625-8632; April 25, 1979; Muskie is ready to accept a Magnuson (D-Washington) amendment to change the budget levels for fiscal 1979 to take account of incorrect estimates of cost in the food stamp program, but others debate it at greater length. The issue arose when Magnuson was informed that if food stamp spending were not increased, the benefit for all recipients would be cut by one-third for the months of July, August and September.
8631; April 25, 1979; Muskie accepts an amendment by Roth (R-Delaware) to reduce allowances in 1980, 1981, and 1982 by $400, comprised of $200 in federal film production costs, and $200 in non-Defense Department travel, on which he says he has communicated with his ranking member, Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) and the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Magnuson (D-Washington).
8635; April 25, 1979; Muskie and Melcher (D-Montana) have a very brief colloquy on the issue of assistance for the Milwaukee Railroad, whose reorganization threatens to cut its 9800 miles of service track to 2400, with drastic effects on the economies of affected states, including Montana, at the close of which Melcher withdraws his amendment.
8636; April 25, 1979; Proxmire (D-Wisconsin) delivers his view of the budget resolution, and Muskie and Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) have a brief colloquy on the question of tax expenditures, tax preferences that shield certain portions of income from taxation, which Kennedy asserts have been spared from all cuts, although they are a significant source of federal expenditures.
8639, 8640; April 25, 1979; As the debate on the budget resolution winds down, Muskie has exchanges with Stevens (R-Alaska) and others on the question of cost-of-living increases for federal civil service retirees.
8642; April 25, 1979; Muskie assures Cranston (D-California) that the Budget Committee is not a line item committee, so the Appropriations Committee can allocate available funds in whatever fashion it chooses.
8647; April 25, 1979; Muskie and Bradley (D-New Jersey) have a brief discussion in which Muskie says that although first budget resolution totals are not binding, they do represent a guideline which authorizing and appropriating committees should try to respect.
21449; July 31, 1980; As Byrd (D-West Virginia) prepares to call up the adjournment resolution for the August recess, Weicker (R-Connecticut) offers an amendment eliminating the August recess and providing recess for a long weekend over Labor Day, a highly unusual action in the Senate, and one that creates lot of antipathy. In the successive discussion, Muskie and some of the other committee chairmen join in, pointing out the limitations of what could be accomplished even with every member in Washington through August. Fifteen days earlier, on July 15, Carter had given what became known as his “malaise” speech, although he never used the term. Prior to that, he had spent two weeks at Camp David interviewing a wide range of persons, including former Cabinet members, Members of Congress, and others, to seek a new direction for his administration, and he announced a number of ambitious goals in terms of cutting back on oil imports, rationing of gasoline, and a new emphasis on developing alternative fuels and on conservation. Weicker’s claim was that the government had more or less come to a halt for several weeks while this process worked itself out, and that to cope with the President’s new energy program, Congress should stay in session and work through August.
Conferee on H. Con. Res. 107, congressional budget, 11214
11214; May 15, 1979; Muskie is named as a conferee on S. Con Res. 22, the first concurrent budget resolution, to reconcile differences between the House and Senate passed resolutions.
Report: Committee of Conference on H. Con. Res. 107, Budget, 11878
11878; May 21, 1979; Byrd, on behalf of Muskie, reports the conference report on H. Con. Res. 107, the first concurrent budget resolution.
Congressional budget: setting forth (H. Con. Res. 107), conference report, 12398-12405, 12410, 12411, 12413
Congressional budget: setting forth (H. Con. Res. 107) conference report, 12399
Table: Congressional budget-conference agreement and President's budget, 12401
Table: Senate committee allocations pursuant to congressional budget, 12410-12413
12398-12405; May 23, 1979; Muskie makes his opening statement on the conference report on the first concurrent budget resolution, H. Con. Res. 107, explaining that since the House rejected the conference report because of the education funding, Senate conferees agreed to add $375 million in that category in the expectation that this will produce the necessary House votes for enactment.
12410-12413; May 23, 1979; When the Senate has passed the conference report on the first concurrent budget resolution, Muskie ends his part in the floor debate by thanking his colleagues and the Committee staff, and others reciprocate.
Report: Expenditure of Foreign Currencies for Travel Abroad, 13854, 22631
13854; June 7, 1979; Each year the Secretary of the Senate submits a report of the standing committees and various delegations and groups detailing the expenses incurred in the performance of authorized travel, and Muskie’s travel expenses are listed as are those of other Members and of staff.
22631; August 3, 1979; Reports of standing committees, joint committees, delegations and groups and what they have spent on authorized foreign travel, are printed. Muskie expenses are shown as he is chairman of the budget committee
Table: Budget status, 1979, 15939
Budget: outlays and limits, 15939
15939; June 21, 1979; Muskie warns his colleagues that when H.R. 4289, the 1979 supplemental appropriations bill is debated, the spending it would provide is barely $189 million below the budget authority level authorized by the second budget resolution, and there is no room at all for increased outlay levels, which means that amendments to add funds must also include proposals to reduce other program funds so as to make room for the proposed additions.
Congressional budget: revising (see S. Con. Res. 36, 53), 22959, 32962
22959; September 5, 1979; Muskie reports S. Con. Res. 36, the second budget resolution for fiscal years 1980, 1981 and 1982, which include a substantial list of instructions to specific committees to reduce budget authority and outlays within their jurisdiction during these years.
32962; November 16, 1979; Muskie reports an original resolution, S. Con. Res. 53, embodying the budget figures in the conference report on S. Con. Res. 36, but notes that a final resolution on reconciliation is not included, because the House stripped reconciliation and is assuming that House Committees will voluntarily make the $3.6 billion savings on their own, while the Senate has assumed that without reconciliation restrictions, no such savings will eventuate. Instead of instructions, the resolution contains sense of the Senate language urging the Committees to make the savings.
Congressional budget: revising (S. Con. Res. 36), 24709, 24783-2478 8, 24791, 24795, 24797, 24799-24803, 24809-24816, 24821, 24822, 24959, 24962, 24964, 24973, 24974, 24979, 24981-24985, 24991, 24995, 25001, 25005-25010, 25011, 25013, 25042, 25044, 25200-25203, 25211-25213, 25214-25219, 25220, 25224, 25225, 25228-25233, 25236, 25238, 25239, 25247
Congressional budget: process modifications, 24709
Explanation: Second budget resolution compromise, 24710
Congressional budget: revising (S. Con. Res. 36), 24781, 24846, 24959
Report: Congressional Budget Resolution (S. Con. Res. 36), 24788-24791
Exon, Senator: tribute, 24794
Congressional budget: revising (S. Con. Res. 36), to table McGovern amendment, 24803
Congressional budget: revising (S. Con. Res. 36), to table Cranston amendment, 24813
Defense budget: increase, 24982-24985, 25010, 25011
Table: Military resources of NATO, Warsaw Pact, and People's Republic of China, 24984
Table: Strategic nuclear program (selected data), 25007-25009
Analysis: Tax Cuts-Roth/Danforth Amendment to S. Con. Res. 36, 25201
Table: Roth/Danforth amendment outlay changes by function, 25203
Congressional budget: revising (S. Con. Res. 36), to table Bumpers Amendments, 25239
24709; September 14, 1979; Muskie makes a brief statement describing the cuts that various committees are required to make in order to stay within the reported budget resolution and on track to a balanced budget for fiscal year 1981, and notes that these cuts have been negotiated down slightly in the case of social security benefits and veterans compensation. When the second budget resolution for 1980 was reported, it would have required half a dozen Committees to reduce spending by $4 billion, but a series of meetings with Committee Chairman subsequently led to a reconciliation instruction of $3.6 billion in savings.
24783-24788, 24791; September 17, 1979; Muskie makes his opening statement on S. Con. Res. 36, the second concurrent budget resolution for fiscal year 1980, and explains that it represents a three-year budget plan which will require reductions in spending already approved by Congress in order to provide for a balanced budget in fiscal year 1982 and a substantial tax cut in fiscal year 1982.
24795; September 17, 1979; Muskie gives Domenici (R-New Mexico) ten minutes of time to make his opening statement on the second budget resolution.
24797; September 17, 1979; Muskie arranges to give McGovern (D-South Dakota) the chance to call up his proposed amendment, and yields time for that purpose.
24799-24803; September 17, 1979; Muskie has a brief colloquy with Jepson (R-Iowa) centering on the savings the Budget Committee has assumed can be made in programs that fall within the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Committee, in particular the school lunch subsidy and the special milk program, and Muskie assures him that the Budget Committee has no power to dictate that these programs be the source of savings, but merely lists them as suggestions, and then gives a rebuttal to the McGovern amendment, which would eliminate the reconciliation requirement that the Agriculture Committee find $100 million in savings.
24809-24813; September 17, 1979; Muskie reacts to a Cranston (D-California) effort to replace the $100 million reconciliation reduction for the Veterans Committee with a $300 million increase, and expresses his frustration that the arguments he is presented with simply reflect a desire not to save funds anywhere in the veterans’ federal programs. The motion to table passes, 49-39.
24814; September 17, 1979; Muskie says that a Schweiker (R-Pennsylvania) amendment to alter the inflation assumptions in the budget resolution would have the effect of altering all other the other numbers as well, and that this is not an exercise that should be done on the Senate floor based on one Member’s or economist’s assumption.
24821, 24822; September 17, 1979; As the Senate moves to vote on the Schweiker amendment, Muskie yields back his time, and as his colleagues discuss the order in which amendments may be called up, comments that to his knowledge, Hollings (D-South Carolina) intends to call his amendment up after the Muskie substitute amendment has been voted.
24959, 24962, 24964; September 18, 1979; Domenici (R-New Mexico) and Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) offer an amendment to change budgetary procedure so as to be certain that no appropriated funds above the budget ceilings can be finally enacted until after all of the appropriations have been passed and the total costs known. The goal was to constrain the process, and it was particularly strongly resisted by Magnuson (D-Washington), chairman of the Appropriations Committee. Muskie speaks against it also.
24973, 24974; September 18, 1979; Muskie has a brief discussion with colleagues over the procedure to be followed in debating and voting on amendments to the defense function of the second budget resolution.
24979, 24981-24985; September 18, 1979; Muskie hears the debate on the Hollings (D-South Carolina) amendment which would add $3.2 billion to the defense function in the budget resolution and says that since all debate has been by members in favor of the amendment, he will present his views as an opponent of it.
24991; September 18,1979; As he yields time for further debate, Muskie warns that time on the resolution is running down, and that four or five amendments remain to be debated, each one of which is eligible for a full hour’s debate.
24995; September 18, 1979; As Hollings continues the debate on his amendment to increase funding for the defense function, Muskie asks him how much longer he intends to speak and points out that other Senators have amendments and they would like to have time to have them debated fully, too.
25001; September 18, 1979; As Exon (D-Nebraska) prepares to debate his amendment, which is a substitute for the Hollings defense amendment, Muskie clarifies the available time situation to make sure all who wish to speak will have the opportunity.
25005-25010; September 18, 1979; Muskie argues against the Exon amendment, which is then rejected, following which he notes that a vote on Division 1 of the Hollings amendment, funding defense for fiscal 1980 only, apparently enjoys majority support.
25011, 25013; September 18, 1979; The Senate then votes on Division 2 of the Hollings amendment, setting the spending levels for fiscal years 1981 and 1982, with Muskie making a final argument against the 5 percent increase in defense spending.
25042; September 18, 1979; As debate on the second budget resolution continues, Javits (R-New York) proposes an amendment to substantially increase funding for the low income fuel assistance program to reflect the substantial increase in oil prices, which would otherwise effectively halve the existing program, and Muskie agrees that a transfer from the energy supply function to the income support function could be readily made, so the amendment is withdrawn.
25044; September 18, 1979; Muskie agrees with Bentsen (D-Texas) that a further way to reduce organizational and management costs at the federal level would be to reduce paperwork requirements along the lines that a commission on paperwork has already identified, and Bentsen then withdraws his amendment.
25200-25203; September 19, 1979; Muskie argues that the proposed Roth (R-Delaware) amendment is simply a continuation of business-as-usual behavior in its combination of tax cuts for three successive years, and its spending cuts, which would effectively require the Congress to cut spending in domestic programs by $20 billion in fiscal 1980.
25211-25213; September 19, 1979; As the debate continues, Muskie notes that an Armstrong (R-Colorado) amendment to provide for tax cuts and spending cuts in the coming years is merely a watered down version of the Roth amendment, and points out that if a tax cut becomes necessary at some point in the near future, neither the Budget Committee nor the Congress as a whole are precluded from offering one, but that the present problem is inflation, which the budget is designed to help bring under control.
25214-25219; September 19, 1979; As Muskie tries to wrap up remaining amendments within the time limitations for debate on budget resolutions, Melcher (D-Montana) proposes corporate tax changes for dealing with income earned abroad, to which end he wants to assume additional revenues, and Muskie reminds him that the Budget resolution is not the vehicle for debating tax law changes.
25220; September 19, 1979; Muskie and Pressler (R-South Dakota) have a brief exchange in which Pressler agrees to withdraw his amendment, to increase funding for alcohol as an auto fuel additive, and Muskie notes that the addition of funding for this purpose in the energy function will ensure adequate funds for the purpose.
25224, 25225; September 19, 1979; Kassebaum (R-Kansas) offers an amendment altering the deficit estimate in the budget resolution by raising it by $1.6 billion, and explains that this is to compensate for the fact that the Budget Committee has made its revenue estimate too high on an assumption that a windfall profits tax on oil companies will be enacted, an argument Muskie rejects. He reminds her that the Budget Committee does not have the authority to require a specific tax to be enacted, and simply notes that reducing the deficit, in his view, should include both the spending and the revenue side of the budget.
25228-25233; September 19, 1979; As the Senate moves toward a vote on the Kassebaum (R-Kansas) amendment, the debate becomes mired in parliamentary suppositions, and turns into a preview of a debate on the windfall profits tax expected to come before the Senate in the future.
25236; September 19, 1979; As time on the budget resolution begins to run out, Muskie makes an attempt to organize the final votes at a specific time so that Senators would know when they need to be present for a vote.
25238, 25239; September 19, 1979; Muskie moves to table the Bumpers (D-Arkansas) amendment which would reduce domestic program spending by the amount that the Senate voted to add to defense spending the previous day, and it is tabled 57-41.
25247; September 19, 1979; When the second budget resolution is ultimately passed, 62 to 36, the usual post-debate orgy of thanks and congratulations on all sides breaks out.
Public debt: temporary increase (H.R. 5369), 26690
26690; September 28, 1979; Muskie briefly comments on a proposed House rules change dealing with the procedures for temporarily raising the debt limit, and expresses some concern that it may have the effect of modifying the budget act in an undesirable direction.
Appropriations: conference report on H. J. Res. 404, 26776, 26778-26780
26776, 26778-26780; September 28, 1978; In discussing the situation surrounding Senate consideration of H. J. Res. 404, a 30-day continuing resolution, Muskie says the House is trying to blackmail the Senate into accepting a conference report which would leave a Congressional pay raise of 12.9 percent in place, while ducking such a vote on the House side, and says he will vote down the resolution. The complicating factor in this case was that the House had completed its work and was in the process of leaving the city, with a threat to adjourn, which would mean that anything short of passing the conference report would have cut all federal payrolls at midnight Sunday, when existing authority under the law would lapse.
Lonely Figure — Trying To Hold Off Fiscal Wolves, Ward Sinclair, Washington Post, 27336
Budget: tribute, 27336
27336; October 4, 1979; Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) compliments Muskie on the effort he made during the days of debate on the second budget resolution, and recommends a news story describing the debate.
Conferee on S. Con. Res. 36, congressional budget, 27395, 30325
27395; October 5, 1979; Byrd (D-West Virginia) lays down the second concurrent budget resolution, S. Con. Res. 36, and appoints Muskie as one of the conferees on the resolution.
30325; October 31, 1979; Byrd, on Muskie’s behalf, reports that the House has requested a further conference on the second budget resolution, and takes the procedural steps necessary to send the measure back to conference, after appointing conferees, who include Muskie.
Taxation: gift tax exclusion (see S. 1683), 28583
28583; This is an error. The page lists cosponsorships, but Muskie isn’t one of them and this bill is not listed at all. Muskie is not shown in connection with any action on the bill, which is a Hatch tax bill, on which no Senate action was taken.
Congressional budget: conference report on S. Con. Res.36, 31245-31247, 31328-31242
Congressional budget: conference report on S. Con Res. 36, 31251
31245-31247; November 7, 1979; [Index error: Actual beginning page 31237]; As the debate on the conference report on S. Con. Res. 36 begins, Muskie explains the reasons behind the delay in bringing it to the Senate for consideration and mentions that the House has resisted the reconciliation instructions asking seven Committees to reduce their spending, a House-Senate difference that remains unresolved.
He says the House intends to report the conference report with an amendment to strike the reconciliation provision, which, if it happens, will require some further action by the Senate, and warns that it will not come in the form of a third resolution allowing more spending, but that some programs will be crowded out as they must all fit within the budget ceilings.
31245-31247; November 7, 1979; Muskie has a brief colloquy with Byrd (I-Virginia) and Armstrong (R-Colorado) the gist of which is that both announce something should be done about the budget, while neither makes any notable contribution by way of suggesting what that something should be.
31328-31242; November 7, 1979; [Index misprint. Actual pages 31247-31250] Cranston (D-California) announces that he will not support the conference report on the second budget resolution because the reconciliation instructions have not been removed from it, and he believes they are based on unrealistic demands by the Budget Committee for his Committee, Veterans’ Affairs, to cut spending by $100 million, and notes that he has advised the Committee of this by letter.
31251; November 7, 1979; At the close of the day, and without further debate, Muskie offers the amendment in the form of a substitute which will be the Senate’s version of S. Con. Res. 36, the second concurrent budget resolution. As Muskie explained earlier, the inability of the House and Senate to reach agreement requires this parliamentary action.
Congressional budget: revising (S. Con. Res. 53), 32962-32964, 34435, 34436
Table: Congressional budget revision under S. Con. Res. 53, 34435, 34436
32962-32964; November 16, 1979; Muskie reports an original resolution, S. Con. Res. 53, embodying the budget figures in the conference report on S. Con. Res. 36, but notes that a final resolution on reconciliation is not included, because the House stripped reconciliation and is assuming that House Committees will voluntarily make the $3.6 billion savings on their own, while the Senate has assumed that without reconciliation restrictions, no such savings will eventuate. Instead of instructions, the resolution contains sense of the Senate language urging the Committees to make the savings.
34435; December 4, 1979; When Muskie has finished speaking on arms control, he goes on to point out that a failure to ratify the SALT II treaty will also have budgetary effects on the order of $40 billion, which should be kept in mind.
34435, 34436; December 4, 1979; Muskie says that now that the second budget resolution has passed, it is possible to publish the spending allocations that will apply to each of the committees.
Oil companies: excess profits tax (H.R. 3919), 33082, 33092, 33612, 33792, 34033, 34317, 34318, 34657-34660 SP 79-12-07, 34662, 34663, 34665, 34926, 34928, 34954, 34955, 35065, 35247-35250, 35252, 35253, 35320, 35634, 36022, 36023, 36090, 36264, 36283, 36297-36300, 36321, 36323, 36324, 36427, 36430-36433, 36436, 36461, 36465, 36484, 36485, 36498
Taxation: oil companies' excess profits (H.R. 3919), 33082, 33092, 33792, 34033, 34317, 34318, 34657-34660, SP 79-12-07, 34662, 34663, 34665, 34926, 34928, 34954, 34955, 35065, 35247-35250, 35252, 35253, 35320, 35634, 36021, 36023, 36090, 36264, 36283, 36297-36300, 36321, 36323, 36324, 36427, 36430-36433, 36436, 36461, 36465, 36484, 36485, 36498
Taxation: carryover basis provisions of Tax Reform Act, 33082
Real estate tax: repeal carryover basis provisions, 33082
Memorandum: Carryover Basis Provisions of Real Estate Tax, Committee on Budget, 33082
Oil companies: excess profits tax (H.R. 3919), 33611, 33615, 34457, 35070, 35321, 35383, 35385, 36021,36087,36276
Taxation: oil companies' excess profits (H.R. 3919), 33611, 33615, 34457, 35070, 35321, 35383, 35385, 36021,36087,36276
Taxation: answering comments by Senators Domenici, Long, Hatch and McClure on oil excess profits tax, 34317, 34318
Oil companies: critique and rebuttal to Senators Domenici, Long, Hatch and McClure on excess profits tax, 34317, 34318
Table: Budget demand for the 1980's, 34317, 34318
Taxation: receipts based on GNP, 34658-34660, SP 79-12-06
Table: Tax revenues with indexing, 34926
Inflation: proposed indexing of tax rates, 34926, 34928
Federal spending: limitation amendment, 35247
Roth, Senator: spending limitation amendment, 35247
Memorandum: Revised Basis for Projected GNP, Committee on Budget, 35249
Table: GNP estimates (1978-84), 35250
Taxation: proposed cost-of-living adjustments, 34926, 34928
Taxation: itemized deduction of State and local nonbusiness fuel taxes, 34954, 34955
Gasoline: itemized deduction of State and local nonbusiness fuel taxes, 34954, 34955
Budget Act: point of order against spending limitation amendment, 35247
Point of order, 35253
List: Current programs and expenditures on gasohol production, 36283
Gasohol: Federal excise tax exemption, 36283
Coal-fueled boilers: energy investment credit, 36297
Oil companies: cloture of debate on H.R. 3919, 35258, 35355, 35596, 35634, 35691, 35912, 36024, 36157, 36441
Taxation: cloture of debate on H.R. 3919, 35258, 35355, 35596, 35634, 35691, 35912, 36024, 36157, 36441
Taxation: LIFO inventories, 36427
Oil: tax liabilities due to involuntary liquidations of LIFO inventories, 36427
Synthetic fuels: investment 36430-36433
Oil companies: excess profits tax (H.R. 3919), to table Percy amendment, 36300
Taxation: oil companies' excess profits (H.R. 3919), to table Percy amendment, 36300
Savings accounts: tax exemption for part of interest income, 36461
Taxation: germaneness of Tower amendment to H.R. 3919, 36485
Oil companies: appeal to ruling of the Chair on Tower amendment, 36485
Oil companies: germaneness of Tower amendment to H.R.3919, 36485
Alaska Natives: excess oil profits tax, 36498
33082; November 19, 1979; As the Senate debates H.R. 3919, the windfall profits tax bill, the issue under discussion is the 1976 law which altered the way capital gains are treated upon transfer at death, replacing the stepped-up basis for heirs to a carryover basis which was proposed to take effect on December 31, 1979. Under the stepped-up basis all capital gains entirely escape taxation at inheritance. The purpose of the carryover basis was to capture and tax some portion of those gains. Muskie says he has not been involved in the debate and while he understands the issue, does not have in-depth knowledge of it, and offers a memorandum from Budget Committee staff which analyses the issue.
33092; November 19, 1979, Muskie wraps up a brief colloquy with Byrd (I-Virginia) exploring the latter’s plan to hold hearings on the entire issue of carryover basis and whether it can be made workable or whether the underlying philosophy is faulty.
The following listed pages are not shown in the official Congressional Record Index, although each of them is part of the full record of the debate on the windfall profits tax.
33577; November 27; 1979; After the defeat of an amendment to set aside $10 billion of the windfall profits tax revenue for the purpose of railroad rehabilitation, McGovern (D-South Dakota) whittles his suggestion to $1 billion for a second try, at which Muskie objects to the effort to create “trust funds” as a way of enshrining one or another favored spending goal at the expense of the overall priority-setting exercise that the budget demands.
33578; November 27, 1979; Muskie joins the debate about a Magnuson (D-Washington) amendment which would eliminate the “trust funds” in the reported bill, eliminate all refundable tax credits that go beyond tax liability, and convert all entitlements in the bill to authorizations, subject to the normal appropriations process.
33582; November 27, 1979; As debate over the Magnuson (D-Washington) amendment continues, Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) seeks to offer an amendment striking a third “trust fund” from the reported bill, the one setting aside general revenue funds to lower social security taxes, and in the discussion learns that this “trust fund” is intended as a one-year place holder until Congress can decide what to do about the social security program. Muskie agrees that this comports with his understanding of the situation.
33588; November 27, 1979; Muskie gives a presentation to the Senate of the budgetary effects of the actions the body has taken in its budget decisions, and in the windfall profits tax debate, attempting to put into perspective the various spending schemes that are already moving through the Congress and for which funding will be demanded in future years. As he winds up his remarks, he had exchanges with other colleagues on the substance of his predictions.
33597; November 27, 1979; Muskie and Domenici (R-New Mexico) have an exchange in which Muskie defends his presentation and its intent and takes exception to some of the characterizations that Domenici expresses.
33611; November 27, 1979; Muskie is shown as one of the sponsors of Leahy (D-Vermont) amendment No. 700 to H.R. 3919, the windfall profits tax bill. The Leahy amendment would restore a House-passed provision in the bill to subject a somewhat smaller amount of the oil revenues of independent producers to the 22-percent oil depletion allowance, which would have the effect of making more income subject to the windfall profits tax.
33615; November 27, 1979; Muskie is shown as one of the sponsors of the Magnuson (D-Washington) amendment No. 706 to H.R. 3919, the windfall profits tax bill. The Magnuson amendment was adopted during debate.
33792; November 28, 1979; As the Senate prepares to vote on the Javits (R-New York) amendment directing revenue from the windfall profits tax to oil exploration incentives in non-traditional geographical areas, Muskie seeks to ascertain that this proposal does not create a new trust fund or reserve, but would be subject to the normal appropriations process.
34033; November 29, 1979; In the course of debate on the windfall profits tax, Byrd (D-West Virginia) seeks to establish a time agreement to move on to less-controversial legislation, and in this instance, references a the airport bill, which needs a budget waiver, to which Muskie responds, but which has nothing directly to do with the windfall profits tax..
34317, 34318; December 3, 1979; Muskie says that when he made his presentation several days earlier outlining the budgetary needs he could foresee in the decade of the 1980s, he was unable to remain on the floor to listen to countering arguments, so he briefly summarizes them and gives his rebuttal to them.
34457; December 4, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of a Leahy (D-Vermont) amendment No. 859 to H.R. 3919, the windfall profits tax bill, which would limit the extent of the depletion allowance for independent producers.
34657; December 5, 1979; Muskie joins his colleagues in a mild dispute over whose time is being used and notes that under the time agreement, there are six hours total and he is entirely within his rights to yield some of that time to colleagues on his side of the argument.
34658-34661; December 5, 1979; Muskie says that the pending amendment, which is touted as a tax cutting amendment will not, in fact, cause a tax cut, because all it does is place a limit of 20.5 percent of Gross National Product on federal revenues, declining by a half-percentage point per year until 1982, and he argues that this establishes an entirely different revenue figure than is in the budget resolution, and both cannot be implemented at the same time, concluding with a discussion with Domenici (R-New Mexico).
34662-34664; December 5, 1979; Byrd (D-West Virginia) makes a motion to table the Roth amendment, which motion passes 49 to 44, and the amendment’s supporters claim that the Senate has now broken a promise it made to cut taxes, a claim Muskie strongly disputes.
34665; December 5, 1979; When others have finishing contributing their thoughts to this discussion, Muskie raises a budgetary point of order against the amendment, which is upheld.
34926; December 6, 1979; Muskie makes his arguments against an Armstrong-Dole amendment which would index individual income taxes to the rate of inflation, and points out that doing this will reduce revenues while the existing indexing in spending programs like social security create a demand for higher spending.
34928; December 6, 1979; After the Senate has voted by 49 to 38 to table the Armstrong-Dole amendment, Muskie makes a statement summarizing his views on the proposal.
34954, 34955; December 6, 1979; As debate continues, Helms (R-North Carolina) proposes to reinstate the itemized deduction for state gasoline taxes for non-business buyers of gasoline, something he made strenuous efforts to do on the 1978 tax bill. Long (D-Louisiana) sets out his arguments against this proposal and has a brief colloquy with Muskie about the budget impact of the deduction.
35065; December 7, 1979; Muskie makes his final argument against the Helms (R-North Carolina) proposal to revive the tax deduction for non-business use of gasoline, as Helms repeats his claims, and a motion to table ends the debate.
35070; December 7, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of a Bumpers (D-Arkansas) amendment No. 870, to modify a pending amendment that would suspend the windfall profits tax if the rate of oil price decontrol is altered. Bumpers’ amendment would instead give the President the right to give Congress a 30 day notice of such a change, during which time Congress could react as it wished.
35247-35250, 35252, 35253; December 10, 1979; Muskie again tries to make the point that writing spending limitations into a tax law will have absolutely no effect on actual authorized spending, and argues against Roth (R-Delaware), the author of the spending limitation proposal, that making certain assumptions about the size of the Gross National Product and the rate of inflation does not mean that either GNP or inflation will be affected by those assumptions. After Roth’s motion to waive the Budget Act is tabled, Muskie raises the point of order that lies against the Roth amendment by the terms of the Budget Act.
35258; December 10, 1979; Muskie is listed as one of the signatories to a cloture petition which Byrd (D-West Virginia) lays down to end debate on the windfall profits tax bill, saying the Senate has been debating the bill for four weeks and invoking cloture would at least prevent the presentation on nongermane amendments, which take up time for little purpose.
35320; December 11, 1979; Muskie speaks in support of the Bradley (D-New Jersey) amendment, which would apply the windfall profits tax to newly discovered oil, and to tertiary oil recovered by methods which become cost-effective only with the price rise in OPEC oil, making the point that oil prices have doubled since the House Ways and Means Committee began writing the windfall profits tax bill, from $14 a barrel to $32 a barrel. The amendment is subsequently withdrawn.
35321; December 11, 1979; Muskie is shown as a cosponsor of the Bradley amendment when Byrd (D-West Virginia) offers a modification to that proposal in his own name.
35355; December 11, 1979; Muskie is again shown on the cloture petition when Byrd (D-West Virginia) sends it to the desk. During this time, the question of having a vote to shut off debate was one of the factors involved in the back room efforts to negotiate a final windfall profits tax. By this time in a debate, most Senators would know where the votes are on most of the likely amendments, so to avoid total gridlock, negotiations often help pave the way for a final resolution, and the potential threat of a cloture vote can sometimes encourage negotiators to come to terms.
35383; December 11, 1979; Bradley files another amendment, No. 794, to his original amendment, and Muskie’s name is shown as a cosponsor.
35385; December 11, 1979; Muskie’s name is among those shown as cosponsors of a Magnuson amendment, No. 837.
35596; December 11, 1979; Muskie’s name is among those shown on a cloture motion.
35634; December 12, 1979; Muskie speaks about the way the negotiations have gone and says that Byrd (D-West Virginia) has done his best to promote an agreement to come to a vote on the question of taxing newly discovered oil, but that the negotiations have broken down.
35691; December 12, 1979; Muskie’s name is among those shown on a cloture motion.
35912; December 13, 1979; When the Senate proceeds to vote on cloture, the list of those on the motion to invoke cloture includes Muskie’s name. Cloture failed to be invoked on a 56-40 vote.
36021; December 14, 1979; When Byrd (D-West Virginia) offers his compromise amendment on the windfall profit tax, Muskie is listed as one of those who are cosponsors.
36022, 36023; December 14, 1979; Muskie talks about the compromise amendment that is being offered and points out that the price hikes in oil do not involve any additional cost to oil companies, since they are passed through to the consumer, so the issue is restoring some of that windfall profit to the consumer. Throughout this debate, efforts were made to portray the entire issue in terms of incentives and disincentives to oil companies, although it was evident that the price of oil itself constituted a substantial incentive to find more.
36087; December 14, 1979; When Byrd (D-West Virginia) calls up his compromise amendment, Muskie’s name is listed as one of its cosponsors.
36090; December 14, 1979; Along with his colleagues, Muskie makes a very brief statement congratulating Byrd on having developed his compromise amendment, and the compromise is voted, 78 to 13, by the full Senate.
36157; December 14, 1979; When a cloture petition on the windfall profits tax is sent to the desk, Muskie’s name appears among those petitioning to close off debate, as arrangements are made to have the vote on the following Monday.
36264; December 15, 1979; Muskie says he will oppose the Danforth (R-Missouri) amendment to impose a federal tax on the royalties that a state may earn from state-owned oil deposits, arguing that federal taxation of state income is a complex constitutional field of law, and that the amendment could set a precedent for other claims against state-owned resources that generate income. Danforth’s argument was that four of the states would be reaping a substantial windfall revenue gain as a result of artificial price increases for crude oil,
36276; December 15, 1979; When Magnuson (D-Washington) offers his amendment on alcohol tax credits in connection with the production of what was then referred to as gasahol, Muskie is shown as one of the cosponsors.
36283; December 15, 1979; When the Magnuson amendment on alcohol fuel production was introduced, an opposing amendment by Dole (R-Kansas) was laid down, and the resultant compromise between the two proposals was greeted by Muskie as acceptable.
36297-36300; December 15, 1979; Muskie argues that a Percy (R-Illinois) amendment which would provide a 20 percent investment tax credit for oil-to-coal conversions by business, lasting four years and at a cost of $1.1 billion a year, is just another way to spend the funds raised by the windfall profits tax bill instead of preserving them for the purpose of balancing the budget for 1981, as has been repeatedly been announced.
36321; December 15, 1979; Muskie notes that although another energy tax credit proposal by McClure (R-Idaho) is not very costly, he is concerned that the addition of these “small” amendments can readily add up and amount to a substantial sum, so he hopes the Finance Committee conferees will keep an eye on the smaller sums as well as the large ones.
36323, 36324; December 15, 1979; As the discussion continues, Muskie restates his position on the small amendments and says perhaps there should be roll call votes on them to treat all proposals fairly, and it is agreed to let the biomass investment tax credit lay over until the following Monday to complete action on it.
36427; December 17, 1979; Muskie remarks that although he doesn’t fully grasp all the nuances of the LIFO accounting system, an amendment proposed by Stevens (R-Alaska) does not appear to pose budgetary problems, and it is accepted on a voice vote. The LIFO method (short for “last in” “first out”) for inventory accounting was authorized by Congress as a means of helping businesses in an inflationary climate, where more recently acquired inventory could be assumed to have a higher cost basis than older inventory. At this time, it was argued that without modification, the LIFO rules could force oil companies to involuntarily liquidate older inventory and make new purchases on the more expensive spot market.
36430-36433, 36436; December 17, 1979; As the Senate again turns to the McClure (R-Idaho) amendment, dealing with investment tax credits for alcohol fuel production, Muskie responds by pointing out that since that amendment does not actually affect the fiscal year 1980 budget, he does not have any procedural motions at his disposal to defeat it, and is therefore relying on persuasion alone.
36441; December 17, 1979; When the Senate finally votes cloture, to end the debate on the windfall profits tax bill, H.R. 3919, Muskie’s name appears on the cloture petition.
36461, 36465; December 17, 1979; Muskie responds to an amendment presented by Bentsen (D-Texas), which is endorsed by the Finance Committee, to exclude from taxation $200 per person in interest or dividends earned on savings and stock holdings.
36484, 36485; December 17, 1979; When Tower (R-Texas) calls up an amendment that is ruled to be not germane to the bill, Muskie makes the point of order against it. Under Senate rules, in a post-cloture debate situation, non-germane amendments are not permitted.
36498; December 17, 1979; When Gravel (D-Alaska) speaks of Native Americans in Alaska and their claims if new oil should be discovered on their land, he refers to the broad agreement under which the windfall profits tax bill has been considered, and Muskie explains in some detail what the gist of the agreement was. Ultimately, Long (D-Louisiana) says he will take the Gravel amendment into conference and see what can be worked out, so it is passed on a voice vote.
TRADE, TARIFFS, EXPORT CONTROLS
1979; 96th Congress, 1st Session
Countervailing duties: extend temporary authority to waive imposition (H.R. 1147), 6542
Foreign trade: authority to waive imposition of countervailing duties (H.R. 1147), 6542
6542; March 28, 1979; Muskie speaks briefly during debate on H.R. 1147, a bill extending authority to the Treasury Secretary to waive countervailing duties on imported goods. Muskie says the countervailing waiver authority is being used inappropriately and ought not be extended. Muskie is reacting primarily to Canadian fish imports, a continuing subject in New England fishing communities because of deep Canadian subsidies to its industry.
Hides: threat to tanning industry, 19248
Leather industry: supply of hides, 19248
On the Trail for Cattlehides, Retailweek (publication), 19249
Exports: minimize interference and improve efficiency of regulation (S. 737), 19248, 19969
Exports: minimize interference and improve efficiency of regulation (S. 737), 19969-19972, 19981, 19982
Animal hides: limit exports, 19969
19248, 19249; July 18, 1979; Muskie makes a statement as he introduces his amendment # 353 to S. 737, the Export Administration Act, saying that the tanning and leather industries are being adversely affected by the fact that other international suppliers, particularly Latin American nations such as Brazil, which manufactures for export to the U.S., are keeping their cattle hides off the markets to develop their domestic industries. At the time, shoe manufacturing represented a substantial source of employment in Maine.
19969-19972; July 21, 1979; During debate on S. 737, the Export Administration Act, Muskie calls up his hide export amendment, and again explains the need for a moderate amount of export control to be imposed on cattle hides, and is joined by colleagues who support the amendment in this effort.
19981, 19982; July 21, 1979; When opponents of his amendment have made their case, Muskie briefly rebuts their argument that controls will damage the livestock industry, and his amendment is defeated.
Trade agreements: approve and implement Tokyo's MTN (H.R. 4537), 20181
20181; July 23, 1979; Muskie briefly outlines the budgetary impact of the Trade Agreements Act, H.R. 4537, a bill ratifying the Tokyo Round of multilateral trade agreements, primarily due to a reduction in revenue from import duties, one of the purposes of the agreements.
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
1979; 96th Congress, 1st Session
Neighborhood development: amend and extend certain laws relative to (S. 1149), 18519, 18520, 18546
Table: Low-income housing funds, 18519, 18546
18519; July 13, 1979; Muskie gives a budgetary perspective on the Housing and Urban Development authorizing legislation, S. 1149, and notes that it is likely to break the budget in terms of the amount allocated for low income housing.
18546; July 13, 1979; Muskie notes that while he supports S. 1064, a bill extending rural housing and housing credit programs, and will vote for it, he does not believe that funds should be appropriated for a new proposed program of Home Ownership Assistance (HOAP), because it creates an entire structure, including subsidies for mortgage interest, property taxes, utilities costs and general upkeep which does not fit within the budget ceilings established, and which would represent a very long-term commitment for a comparatively small number of housing units.
Agriculture, rural development and related agencies: appropriations (H.R. 4387), 19190
Agriculture, rural development and related agencies: appropriations (H.R. 4387), 19191, 19210
Home ownership assistance program: appropriations, 19191
Letter: Home ownership assistance program, by, 19192
19190; July 18, 1979; During debate on H.R. 4387, the agriculture appropriations bill, Muskie joins Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) in cosponsoring the latter’s amendment to eliminate all funding for a new program for rural housing subsidies, HOAP (Home Ownership Assistance Program) because it is unaffordable, the House has refused to fund it, and it entails shortcomings which he describes.
19210; July 18, 1979; Muskie also supports a second Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) amendment to reduce the federal subsidy for the "Special Milk Program" in public schools. The program was a major subsidy to dairy producers, as it took additional fresh milk out of the market, and over time had expanded to be available in schools with other subsidized meal services, in which instances it became a duplication of the subsidized milk generally available with the meal service. Five Administrations consecutively had proposed eliminating it entirely.
Dept. of HUD and related agencies: appropriations (H.R. 4394), 21066, 21067, 21093, 21097, 21110
Table: Dept. of HUD appropriations, 21067
Dept. of HUD and related agencies: appropriations (H.R. 4394), 21097
21066, 21067; July 27, 1979; As the Senate takes up H.R. 4394, appropriations for housing and urban development and the independent agencies, Muskie outlines the manner in which this bill is above budget ceilings, and will contribute to a higher deficit, noting that the primary cause of this budgetary problem is that the authorizing committees have failed to come up with savings they were instructed to make in the first budget resolution.
21093, 21095; 21097; July 27, 1979; As debate winds down on the Proxmire amendment to reduce housing assistance funds in H.R. 4394, the housing and urban development appropriations bill, Muskie expresses his support for the effort, and comments on the factors that are making it hard to stick to budget targets, even though the failure to do that will cause a higher deficit.
21097; July 27, 1979; During subsequent debate, Muskie offers an amendment to strike language that would prohibit retroactive regulations on waste water treatment projects, and notes that he has obtained from both the Environmental Protection Agency and from Senator Bellmon (R-Oklahoma) agreement to limit retroactive regulations on projects where construction will begin within 6 months of the project grant, with the agreement that the Environment and Public Works Committee will revisit the construction grant program of the EPA.
21110; July 27, 1979; As the debate winds down, Muskie says he will be unable to vote for the appropriation because it is already so far over budget targets, and the bill manager, Proxmire (D-Wisconsin) agrees.
Dept. of HUD and related agencies: appropriations conference report on H.R. 4394, 26697
26697; September 28, 1979; Muskie notes that the conference report on the HUD appropriations bill, H.R. 4394, has made significant reductions from the funding provided in the Senate-passed version, which, coupled with the fact that the Senate has now adopted a second budget resolution and has committed to the process by which money already voted can be withdrawn, will allow him to vote in favor of passage.