July 31, 1979
Page 21447
ADJOURNMENT OF THE TWO HOUSES DURING THE MONTH OF AUGUST AND OVER THE LABOR DAY HOLIDAY
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, may we have order in the Senate?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order. Senators wishing to converse will please retire to the cloakroom.
The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 2 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I am about to call up the adjournment resolution. I understand that Mr. WEICKER may wish to oppose the resolution or offer an amendment thereto, but he is present and can speak for himself.
I ask the Chair to lay before the Senate a message from the House of Representatives on House Concurrent Resolution 168.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair lays before the Senate House Concurrent Resolution 168, which will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That when the House adjourns on Thursday, August 2, 1979, it stand adjourned until 12 o'clock meridian on Wednesday, September 5, 1979, and that when the Senate recesses on Friday, August 3, 1979, it stand in recess until 12 o'clock meridian on Wednesday, September 5, 1979.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to the immediate consideration of the concurrent resolution.
UP AMENDMENT NO. 482
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment and ask that it be stated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from West Virginia (Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD) proposes an unprinted amendment numbered 482:
On page 1 strike all the language on lines 5 and 6, and insert in lieu thereof the following:
"Thursday, August 2, Friday, August 3, or Saturday, August 4, 1979, pursuant to a motion made by the Majority Leader in accordance with this resolution, it stand in recess until 11:00 o'clock a.m. on Wednesday, September 5, 1979."
Amend the title to read: "Concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the House from August 2 to September 5, 1979, and a recess of the Senate from August 2, August 3, or August 4, 1979 to September 5, 1979."
UP AMENDMENT NO. 483
Mr. WEICKER. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment to the amendment offered by the Senator from West Virginia, and ask for its immediate consideration, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment will be stated.
The legislative clerk read as follows: The Senator from Connecticut (Mr. WEICKER) offers an unprinted amendment to the amendment (UP No. 482) of the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD) numbered 483:
In lieu of the language proposed to be inserted by the Senator from West Virginia, insert the following:
"Friday, August 31, 1979, it stand in recess until 11 o'clock a.m. on Wednesday, September 5, 1979."
Amend the title to read: "Concurrent resolution providing for an adjournment of the House from August 2 to September 5, 1979, and a recess of the Senate from August 31 to September 5, 1979."
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second to the request for the yeas and nays? There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, no debate is in order on this concurrent resolution, or on any motion or amendment in relation thereto. I ask unanimous consent, however, that Mr. WEICKER may have up to 10 minutes, and that I may have up to 10 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
The Senate will be in order. Who yields time?
Mr. WEICKER. Mr. President, the amendment which I have proposed to the amendment of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia (Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD) in effect knocks out the Senate recess, or, to put it in other words, it permits a recess commencing on Friday, August 31, through Labor Day, and no more.
I do not intend, very frankly, to stand here and demagog against my colleagues, because I think we are all engaged in serious work in committee, on the floor, and elsewhere, and have been for a considerable period of time; but due to certain events transpiring around us, that work has been somewhat impeded and we are off schedule.
It really is not realistic to say that matters have not changed within the last week or so. They have, and drastically so. I suggest, too, that when I take a look at the calendar of unfinished business just on energy alone — and I will read it to you — Senators might wish to reconsider as to whether or not this is an appropriate time to go on vacation.
The Interior Department appropriations bill, which includes all nonnuclear energy programs, including synthetic fuels, conservation, and other programs, has been reported by the House committee and passed the full House. There has been no Senate action.
The Department of Transportation appropriation, including mass transit and Amtrak, will pass the House this week. There has been no Senate action.
The Energy Mobilization Board legislation is in markup in the Senate Energy Committee. I hope we might be able to get it out of that committee this week, but certainly there will be no Senate action if we recess this week.
The Energy Security Corporation measure, no action by the Energy Committee nor by the full Senate.
Department of Energy authorization, reported out by the Senate Energy Committee but no action on the floor.
The windfall profits tax bill is in markup in the Senate Finance Committee. It has already passed the House.
And the standby gasoline rationing is on the House floor, having been passed by the Senate.
There it is, simply stated. Again, I have to repeat, being part of some of these committees I know that those that I sit on and others have been diligently working at the new tasks placed in front of us by the administration, and have been diligently working on legislative responses to the new circumstances presented to us around the world.
I wish I could say that we could walk away from all of this, and it could await our pleasure in the sense of performing our duties. It cannot.
The energy crisis is as severe today or even more so than it was yesterday, last week, or the week before that.
It is simply on that basis that I present my amendment to the Senate. I think it terribly important, not just for the matter of appearance, I might add, but because I think that during this intervening time we can accomplish a great deal. I might also add, especially with the prospect of SALT II and other matters before us which would pretty much occupy the fall, energy production, conservation, energy legislation in all its forms, needs to be acted upon today.
Therefore, I submit my amendment and I hope my colleagues will support it.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
The Senator from West Virginia.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from Connecticut has raised a question here which has already been carefully considered. Recently I called a meeting of members of the Democratic Policy Committee, the majority members of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and of the Finance Committee. The respective chairmen and a number of members attended. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the August recess.
It was the unanimous view of the chairmen of the Budget Committee, the Banking Committee, the Finance Committee, the Environment and Public Works Committee, the Governmental Affairs Committee, and the Energy Committee that the month of August could be better spent by having those committees, task forces thereof, and/or staff members thereof, work on the energy legislation and on the tax bill during the month of August.
This is an $88 billion energy bill. The Budget Committee has the responsibility of studying the budget implications of that bill.
Mr. LONG. Will the Senator yield at that point?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes.
Mr. LONG. The $88 billion is just the energy, but there is a tax of $140 billion.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes. The Banking Committee has the responsibility for the financing and capitalization of the energy corporation. The Committee on Public Works and Environment has the responsibility to study the environmental impact of the legislation. The Governmental Affairs Committee has the responsibility to study the impact of the establishment of a new Government corporation. The Energy Committee, under Mr. JACKSON, has been working to report the energy bill which has in it the Energy Mobilization Corporation, the Energy Security Corporation, the synthetic fuels provision and so on. Mr. JACKSON hopes to report that bill this week.
But Mr. MUSKIE, the chairman of the Budget Committee, who is also here and who can speak for himself, said that his committee could not complete its study of this gigantic bill within a few days, but that instead it would take a few weeks.
So I met with the chairmen collectively to inquire if they would avoid requesting sequential referral, and I received their complete cooperation. They assured me they would not ask for sequential referral but that would have members of their staffs work with members of Mr. JACKSON's Energy Committee staff during August. By proceeding in that manner, by using the month of August to study the budget implications and all of the other ramifications of the energy legislation, it was determined that final action on the bill would be thereby expedited rather than delayed.
As Mr. MUSKIE said, if we do not take enough time in committee to study the budget implications of this bill, then it is going to result in delay when it reaches the floor. And this was the viewpoint of the other chairmen. They all felt that these matters needed study during the month of August by the respective committee staffs. Remember, committees can and will meet during the month of August.
It was the consensus of the chairmen that these problems could be better resolved before the legislation came to the floor, thus avoiding having to resolve the problems on the floor. It was agreed that it would be an exercise in futility for the Senate to stay in session when we could not have either the energy or tax bill ready for floor action before the 15th of September.
I have had numerous conversations with the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Finance about the excess profits tax. I have talked with Senator DOLE, the ranking member. It was the opinion of both the chairman and the ranking member that the committee should wait until all three parts of the package are here and that we should avoid bringing them to the floor one at a time, and that, in any event, if there were any effort to invoke cloture on the excess profits tax bill, so as to prohibit the calling up of nongermane amendments, Senators would not know what they were voting cloture on until they could see the shape and form of the entire package.
So, Mr. President, this is not a matter that has just come to my attention today. I discussed this matter with the appropriate chairmen and the members of the appropriate committees days ago.
Mr. President, in addition to what I have just said, which explains why the Senate will not be able to do anything on the energy legislation until around the middle of September, let me say that of the 67 authorization bills that should be passed this year, the Senate will have passed 58 of those by the time we go out this week. There are a few of the remaining nine bills that have not been reported from the committees yet but, as I say, committees can meet during the recess if they so desire.
Of the appropriations bills, the Senate has already passed six and there is only one that I see that the House has passed and sent over to the Senate which has not been acted upon by the Senate.
That was reported by the committee today, the Treasury and Postal Service bill.
The House does not intend to send the rest of those bills over until we get back in September.
The decks are being cleared. That has been the design behind the scheduling all along, to clear the decks, so that when the Senate comes back in September it will have only a few "must" bills remaining, such as the water resources bill; it will have the second concurrent budget resolution, the deadline for which is September 15. It will dispose of the remaining authorization bills and as I say, there are only nine of them, and it will dispose of the remaining appropriations bills. The Senate cannot dispose of those appropriations bills until they are sent over from the House, because by custom they originate in the House.
The decks will then have been cleared for the energy legislation. Whether we were to stay here 31 days in August or 41 or 51 days in August; the energy bills are not going to be ready for floor action until the committees have had ample time to study all of the implications — environmental, budgetary, and otherwise. And that will require the month of August. Then, the stage will be set for the SALT debate.
The committees — Armed Services, Intelligence, Foreign Relations — have been holding hearings on the SALT II treaty. They have been good hearings. Those hearings will not be complete until after very late in September. As to the SALT Treaty — I have never said it would be scheduled before October 1. I say to you, Mr. President, as one who knows a good bit about the Senate Calendar and whose constant duty it is to schedule the measures and to keep the legislative process moving
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, as one who has the duty of seeing that the legislative process goes forward, of scheduling the bills in an orderly way, I say to you, Mr. President, that if the action on the energy legislation could have been expedited by the Senate's staying in the whole month of August or 3 weeks in August or 2 weeks in August or 1 week in August, that would have been done. Because every Member who met with me on those committees that were represented indicated that if — if — the Senate could make progress by lopping off any portion of that August recess, he would be willing to do it.
Mr. President, I respect the distinguished Senator from Connecticut for the position that he takes here but, may I say, with all due respect, this matter has been fully considered, thoroughly considered, and, in my judgment, the Senate would be wasting its time, wasting the time of Members and probably delaying the final action on the energy legislation, if it stayed in session during the month of August.
There would be little work for us to do on the floor. The distinguished Senator has mentioned the Amtrak bill. That is scheduled for tomorrow. I think I have talked about the other bills that he mentioned — the DOE, Department of Enery authorization bill. The Budget Committee has a problem with that one. It reported out a budget waiver unfavorably. The bill is a billion dollars over the first budget resolution. The distinguished chairman of that committee feels that that measure should be delayed until the shape of other energy legislation has become clear.
The standby rationing proposal — I hope the House will send something over here on that today. I do not know what action the House may take. The Senate passed a standby rationing plan, sent it to the House, the House rejected it, and the Senate stands ready right now, if the House messenger would come in the door with that measure, to call it up today. It would be a privileged matter.
SALT II, I have already discussed. So, Mr. President, I do not have any doubt that every Member of the Senate would not only be willing but would also want to stay during the month of August as much as would be necessary to dispose of energy, legislation if it were ready for the floor and if, in the final analysis, it would contribute to a more thorough and realistic, more rational, and more reasonable final action on such legislation.
Mr. LONG. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes; I yield.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, the Senator, I believe, knows that the proposed windfall profits tax bill has an effective date of January 1. The Senator also knows what has been on the ticker and what I have told him down at the White House, as well as in this Chamber, that we are not going to be ready with that bill for a while. Some of us do not quite like the bum's rush approach to legislation. We think that it is nice to have a lot of recommendations, but to cram it on through as though the Sun will not rise tomorrow, it usually winds up in a lot of mistakes that we regret.
I think if you want to know the No. 1 shortcoming in the Senate, it is not oratory. We have plenty of that. We just never find time to think. Some of us want, once in a while, to think a little bit about these things.
We absorb some knowledge from others, we get a chance to absorb some of the wisdom of our constituents around the Nation, many of whom know a lot more about some of these problems than we do, and then try to act in a way that makes good sense, where we are satisfied that we are doing what is best for the Nation.
I can assure the Senate that, as far as the chairman of the Committee on Finance is concerned, we shall pass out a windfall tax bill. It is up to the Senate to make it tough or not so tough, whatever the Senate wants to do. We shall bring our bill out here.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent that I may proceed for an additional 5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield to the Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. LONG. I say to the Senator that the fact that we have a little time to think about the matter — I know for myself, I have papers stacked up over 3 feet that I want to read and study and meditate over. There are others who, I know, have the same situation. We shall move very expeditiously and push very hard to try to get that bill on the President's desk by October 1, if I can call the date. Of course, it is up to the Senate to decide whether it is going to move that rapidly.
I do think that when you tell everybody you are going to do something, you ought to try to do it. I know, as far as measures within the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee are concerned, we do not have any excuse for breaking our word, having told people this is how we are going to do business.
Mr. BENTSEN. Will the distinguished majority leader yield?
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Yes; I yield.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr: President, this piece of legislation before the Finance Committee is a $140 billion bill. If we take some of the figures as to what the increase in price may be in the next 10 years, another estimate gets it up around $275 billion. I, for one, am not going to vote until I can have a better understanding of the economic impact on this country.
We have had some figures given to us by Treasury. I understand how Treasury can sometimes submit figures to try to prove their point of view. We want our own econometric models. We want to get our own calculations as to how much of an economic impact and how much revenue will be raised and get some idea of how it is going to be expended.
If we do not get that kind of staff work done in order to exercise the soundest of judgment that we can possibly exercise on this very important piece of legislation, I think, we would be derelict in our duty.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, I know the Senator is going to be asked, I am going to be asked when I go home, Why are you not in session? I am ready to explain my position, I am ready to explain why the Senate is not in session.
The chairman of the Budget Committee is here. I should like to have him give his viewpoint, how he sees this legislation from the standpoint of the Committee on the Budget.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I think the distinguished majority leader has accurately described the examination that was made of the possibility of using the August recess or some part of it in order to enact the energy program. Well, if August were the month for the recess or not, August would be premature. If no recess were scheduled, I do not see how we could bring the complex issues raised, not only by the revenue bill but by the bills from Senator JACKSON's committee and Senator PROXMIRE's committee, into focus so that we can make balanced judgments by September 1 — whether or not there is a recess.
From the point of view of the Budget Committee, we cannot even begin examination of the budgetary and economic implications of these bills until they come to us.
Senator JACKSON's committee, hopefully, will approve markup by the end of this next week. Senator PROXMIRE's committee is in markup, I understand, on his piece of the package. Senator LONG has already described the problems and the magnitude of it that faces his committee. We cannot even begin.
Before the distinguished majority leader approached us, Senator BELLMON and I agreed to set up a task force within our committee to begin analyzing the problems from the budget point of view. We began work on that this week. We could not begin earlier to try to complete that work. But the first week in September is going to be a very difficult challenge.
I would like to make one other point, if I may, and that is the notion that if we are not on the Senate floor we are not involved in the Senate business. To me that is a notion that we should challenge.
I find it possible to think more effectively, more comprehensively, more thoughtfully, about these big challenges we face if I am not constantly running all day long between committee rooms and the Senate floor, occupied in physical activity to demonstrate to the public that I am busy.
When I go home to my State, there are two plusses that I always count on. One exposure to my constituents' point of views; second, exposure to my own thinking.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from West Virginia has expired.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Three more minutes.
Mr. MUSKIE. I will take 30 seconds more.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MUSKIE. I do not think that is irrelevant in what we are trying to do.
From the perspective of the Budget Committee, I noted one thing about the habits of legislative bodies. We have to deal in the Budget Committee with the consequences of a lot of mistakes that have been made in policymaking in this Congress over the last 50 years. A lot of those mistakes were made because Senates and Houses of Representatives rushed to policy decisions before they had properly prepared themselves.
The budget would be immeasurably smaller today if we had taken more time in the first instance to make sure our decisions were wise.
I am for the Senate being what it likes to consider itself, a deliberative body, about these energy options that we consider.
I have not begun to consider the environmental implications of this legislation, the budgetary implications, the economic implications, the implications down the line for the CO2 component of the atmosphere and its greenhouse effect and what that could do. Senator RIBIcOFF has been studying that.
There are a lot of questions to be raised and answered. We cannot possibly raise and answer them by September 1, whether or not there is a recess.
Mr. RIBICOFF. Will the Senator yield?
I just came from hearings of the committee with Secretary Schlesinger and Mr. Curtis of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. It became very obvious that the worst thing we could do would be to try to rush through the synthetic fuel program by September 1 or September 15.
It became obvious to me that during the discussion that there were a host of major problems.
Yesterday we had before us the outstanding scientists in the world in climatology and geology and, for the first time, they raised an overwhelming and frightful problem that the world will face because of the use and development in synthetic fuels.
It becomes very obvious that while we could safely go to 2.5 million barrels of synthetic fuels a day, to go to 5 million would be courting disaster.
It is not just the problem of the United States, but the problem of the Soviet Union, the problem of West and East Germany, and South Africa.
Mr. Schlesinger today admitted we should consider a safeguard in writing this legislation with a constant monitoring of the CO2 content to assure the safety features in this legislation.
It also becomes very apparent that we must consider the utilization of this $88 billion not only for a synthetic fuel, but alternate sources of fuel that would not be contaminating, and that we should be considering these new agencies we are placing into being to assure that since there is a problem for the environment, they establish a set of priorities of which energy synthetic or energy producing alternatives would be the least deleterious upon society as a whole.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time has expired.
Mr. RIBICOFF. One more minute.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent that we have 2 more minutes.
Mr. RIBICOFF. It is very obvious we have the responsibility not to rush to judgment because we are committing this Nation on a source of procedure and a source of production by the expenditure of this $88 billion, which may, by themselves, tend to destroy the very society we are trying to save.
Mr. JACKSON addressed the Chair.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I yield to the Senator.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I merely rise in support of the comments of Senator RIBICOFF and Senator MUSKIE, as well as the statements that have been made by the majority leader.
As chairman of the Energy Committee, I say that the fact we are staying in session all during the month of August could not speed up the process which will be underway by Senator MUSKIE's committee, by the Government Affairs Committee under the chairmanship of Senator RIBICOFF, the Committee on Banking and Currency and Urban Affairs chaired by Senator PROXMIRE, with the finance implications that are involved in connection with the President's comprehensive synthetic fuel program, and, of course, the expedited procedures that are involved in the President's proposal, as well as the earlier one that a number of us introduced here.
So I say that the leader is right in the approach he is taking. It is not going to change one iota, as far as I can see, the target date that we hope to meet in connection with the President's program.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I think we have stated the case. I think it is obvious from the standpoint of the facts that if the Senate were to stay in session during the month of August, it would be just for show and not for any constructive purpose.
There is a need for Senators to get back home and talk with their constituents. We should not be making laws in a vacuum.
We are elected to make decisions, but also to make decisions based on informed knowledge of what the problems faced by Americans are.
I myself plan to go back to West Virginia a number of times during the month of August.
I am for a vote.
Mr. WEICKER addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. WEICKER. Mr. President, the first question I have to ask is, has the all-clear sounded before I come out of my bunker here?
I paddled out here on the floor in my little Zodiac. It is like facing the Bismarck, the Tirpitz, and the Graf Spee all in one afternoon.
I have never seen so much power arrayed on one issue on the Senate floor as long as I have been here.
I want to make something clear. I repeat, I have no criticism at all related to my colleagues. The situation that confronts us is one that was presented by outside forces, either within the administration or by circumstances in the world.
The fact is that since these plans were made, a few things have happened, that is, thanks to the executive branch of Government, the whole Government ground to a halt for 2 weeks in July.
It is nobody's fault here on the floor. We have half a new administration. Was there an Energy Mobilization Board bill up until a few days ago? Was there a synthetic fuels bill until a few days ago? This is not something that was initiated here. But you cannot say this just did not happen. It did. Unfortunately, it did.
If you are going to ask the American people to pay the price of what I call "the great navel gaze of 1979," in the sense of the executive being stalled, I think we have to pay the price, too.
The bottom line is that there is no legislation on the books when it relates to energy, with the exception of the heating and cooling stictures. That was passed. The great energy policy of 1978.
Nobody even talks about that anymore. Nothing of any real consequence has been passed. That is the bottom line.
This is a crazy town, and I know that we give our own meaning to words, such as in the Middle East debate over military aid to the Arabs and Israelis: Peace means arms. So what we are saying today is that work means vacation. I am not going to accept that. I have not been here so long that I am going to accept these definitions. It is not that way.
Nobody is saying that the work has to be accomplished on the Senate floor. I think the best arguments that can be made for the amendment I have before the Senate is what the majority leader was discussing with respect to the tremendous volume of work that confronts this body.
For the most part, it is a volume not imposed by ourselves but by the President of the United States, while he got his political house in order, and by other nations of the world who are taking advantage of our lack of self-discipline. That is what is involved, pure and simple.
I suggest to Senators that the way to handle this matter is to get to work, to continue to do it in committee and on the floor and wherever it occurs. If need be, fine, go home to your constituents on the weekends. I do not think they have many nice things to say to many of us, and they will have fewer nice things to say when we appear in our bathing suits or in our tennis shorts or whatever, while they are paying more for a gallon of gasoline, if they can get it.
I will show you how we act and why it looks ridiculous. In 1977, I offered my modified conservation proposal of a 6-day week for the automobile, and it was defeated by a vote of 83 to 7. One month ago, I had it up again — a few things changed — and I was beaten by a vote of 79 to 10. It was exactly the same result, the same piece of legislation, but a few things have changed; and the things that have changed, I think, have to change our style in the Senate and our attention to detail and to duty. I know we have that capacity.
I am sorry we had this done to us, but I am sure the American people are just as sorry about what has been done to them. So let us march along with them and do what has to be done.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. WEICKER. I yield.
Mr. DOLE. I appreciate the Senator's yielding. I cannot vote with him.
Mr. President, I think we need to take the recess for many reasons. In fact, I think the American people may have been saved by the recess. We could have passed all the legislation which has been proposed, and then think where the American people would be. [Laughter.]
This gives us an opportunity to get out of here, breathe some fresh air, and get away from Washington. Some have plans to visit a number of States and some may visit only one. [Laughter.]
It seems to me that the best way to find out what the American people think about a windfall profits tax or a new energy bureaucracy is to go out and talk to the people. I think we are going to find out that 50 miles from Washington, few people have heard about an Energy Mobilization Board, and they probably do not want to hear about it.
I think the Senator has provided a great service, even though I cannot support him, because the American people are saved by this recess. It came just in time. We could have had this bill out here next week or the week after.
It was great wisdom on the part of the majority leader, a few years ago, in securing authorization for this recess. This is a sort of safety valve, a safety net, for the American people.
I would hate to think what would have happened if the Finance Committee, of which I am the ranking Republican, had rushed passage of just any windfall profits tax — without regard to its effect on American energy production.
I think this has been worth the effort. I was going to extend the recess. That was going to be my amendment. [Laughter.] Because an extension might actually help the American people. Make it October 1, and maybe extend the recess beyond October 1.
Mr. HELMS. January.
Mr. DOLE. That may be a little too far — at least, in New Hampshire. At least, let us be realistic. The American people have had enough of Washington telling them what is wrong with the Nation. Now, it is our turn to hear about what is wrong (or right) in Washington from the people.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BAUCUS) . The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President, I move to lay the amendment on the table, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to lay on the table an amendment of the Senator from Connecticut. On this question the yeas and nays have been ordered, and the clerk will call the roll.
The result was announced— yeas, 85, nays 13, as follows:
[Roll call vote tally omitted]