December 17, 1979
Page 36484
Mr. MUSKIE addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the Senator from Maine.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I understand that this amendment is not germane to the bill. It, has been the practice all afternoon, I think, to raise a point of order with respect to germaneness. I must confess that I did not understand all of the implications of this amendment, including cost implication.
But it would seem to me, having adopted a uniform policy with respect to nongermane amendments, that that policy ought, to be continued with respect to other amendments that are not germane.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, a parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, is the amendment germane or not germane?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is not germane.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, let me address myself to the question of germaneness. I contend that it is germane.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President, the amendment simply gives the Secretary of the Treasury, working with the Secretary of Energy, the authority to grant adjustments in specific cases on the basis of special hardship, inequity, or unfair distribution of burdens.
The section amended by the amendment, section 4992, provides for special rules, adjustments, and certain exemptions based on recognized public purposes. The Tower amendment, which is designed to prevent the unintended shutting in or premature abandonment of domestic crude oil, is very much germane to this section.
In addition, section 4994(b) of the committee bill grants the Secretary of the Treasury the authority to prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the windfall profit tax, including, and I quote:
Such changes in the application of the energy regulations for purposes of this chapter as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out such purposes.
The Finance Committee report commentary on this section mentions specifically the need for the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Energy to work closely so that the windfall profit tax does not have unintended results. The DOE exceptions process, which is the general subject of the Tower amendment, is referred to specifically in this context.
I, therefore, contend that the amendment is germane.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, there are other provisions in the bill that seek to protect the producer from hardship. There is a so-called 90-percent rule that was agreed to in committee. And that is in the bill.
There is also the right in the Department of Energy to raise prices.
Mr. President, on this matter of germaneness, every Senator who has been around here for a while ought to know that all you have to do before you vote on cloture is go down there and ask the Parliamentarian what he thinks about your amendment. Ask him if he thinks that the amendment is germane. Sometimes he will want some time to think about it.
But the Parliamentarian, in very short order, will tell any of the Senators whether an amendment is germane or not germane. That is a very, very strict rule on germaneness.
Oftentimes, even though I have been here for 30 years, I cannot tell whether an amendment is going to be ruled germane or not germane.
But the Parliamentarian is fairly familiar with all the precedents in that respect and it is a very strict rule. An amendment can be relevant to the subject of the bill, but not germane under the strict precedents. It is all just a matter of degree.
But the precedents of the Senate are such that the Parliamentarian is required to advise the Chair. Senators, when they vote for cloture, ought to have implicit in that that they are agreeing to abide by the precedents.
Mr. TOWER. If the Senator will yield, this Senator did not vote for cloture.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, the rest of us who voted for cloture are bound by that.
I would ask the Chair to explain to us on what basis the amendment is not germane.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair ordinarily would not like to give advisory opinions before the point of order on germaneness has been made. But in this case, he will.
It is the opinion of the Chair that the amendment offered adds a new element, hardship, before an adjustment could be made. Thus, in the Chair's opinion, under the precedents previously established, it adds, therefore, a new element and is not germane.
Several Senators addressed the Chair.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I make the point of order.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The point of order having been made, the Chair sustains the point of order for the reasons stated.
Mr. TOWER. Mr. President. I appeal the ruling of the Chair, and I ask for the yeas and nays.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There is a sufficient second.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, since this matter came up—
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Appeals are not debatable.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I might speak for 1 minute on this subject?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered.
The Senator from Louisiana is recognized.
Mr. LONG. Mr. President, I felt very kindly toward the oil and gas industry and I have been severely criticized for being even too kindly disposed toward the oil and gas industry.
I am not opposed to the Senator's amendment on the merits. But, Mr. President, when I voted for cloture, like a majority of the Senators here, we voted implicit in that to abide by the strict precedents on germaneness. And they are very, very strict.
The Presiding Officer is doing nothing more than his duty, and the Parliamentarian is doing nothing more than his duty.
Although I, perhaps, would favor the amendment on its merits, it is my painful duty to vote against what the Senator is trying to do and ask everybody else to vote likewise.
Have the yeas and nays been ordered, Mr. President?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The question is on germaneness, whether or not the decision of the Chair will stand as the judgment of the Senate.
The yeas and nays have been ordered and the clerk will call the roll.
Mr. LONG. A point of order, Mr. President.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it.
Mr. LONG. Is a vote to sustain the Chair a "yea" or a "nay" vote?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will not interpret that question.
Mr. MUSKIE. What is the question?
Mr. CHILES. Will the Chair tell us what vote sustains the Chair?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair will simply say that it is the Chair's interpretation that a "yea" vote would uphold the Chair.
The clerk will call the roll.
The second assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
The result was announced — yeas 61, nays 36, as follows:
[Roll call vote tally omitted]