Unanimous-Consent Request

UNANIMOUS-CONSENT REQUEST -- (Senate - February 06, 2007)

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, my good friend, the majority leader, and I have been in a discussion over the last few days, going back to last week, over how to go forward on the Iraq debate. As I have indicated to him both privately and publicly, we on this side of the aisle were certainly looking forward to having an Iraq debate this week and are prepared to do so and are ready to go forward.

I think we all agree at this moment that there is no more important issue facing the Nation than the mission and the fate of the American service men and women in Iraq. This means, of course, that the men and women of this body have no higher duty than to express ourselves openly and honestly on this issue, to take a stand on where we stand. The only truly meaningful tool the Framers gave us to do this was our ability to fund or not fund a war. That is it. This is what Republicans are insisting upon--that the Members of this body express themselves on the question of whether to fund or not to fund the war in Iraq.

I had indicated to my good friend, the majority leader, that I would be propounding another unanimous-consent request at this point, and I will do that now.

I ask unanimous consent that, at a time determined by the majority leader, after consultation with the Republican leader, the Senate proceed en bloc to the following concurrent resolutions under the following agreement: S. Con. Res. 7, the Warner resolution, which is to be discharged from the Foreign Relations Committee; McCain-Lieberman-Graham, regarding benchmarks; Gregg, relating to funding.

I further ask unanimous consent that there be a total of 10 hours of debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; provided further that no amendments be in order to any of these measures; further, that at the use or yielding back of time, the Senate proceed to three consecutive votes on the adoption of the concurrent resolutions in the following order, with no further action or intervening action or debate: McCain-Lieberman-Graham, on benchmarks; Gregg, on funding and supporting our troops; S. Con. Res. 7, the Warner resolution.

Finally, I ask unanimous consent that any resolution that does not receive 60 votes in the affirmative, the vote on adoption be vitiated and the concurrent resolution be returned to its previous status.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, reserving the right to object, and I will object, let me remind our colleagues that 4 years ago last month, we were at exactly the same situation. My party came back to the majority. The Democratic majority of the previous Congress had not passed 11 out of the 13 appropriations bills. And what did the new Republican majority do? We took up an omnibus collection of appropriations bills. We had over 100 amendments offered. We gave everybody in the Senate an opportunity to offer amendments, and we disposed of all of those appropriations bills over a couple-week period.

What my good friend, the majority leader, is suggesting is that we take up a continuing resolution of 11 appropriations bills, with no amendments whatsoever, and he offers as an enticement an extra week off. This is completely unacceptable to the minority. First, he is saying that we cannot get adequate consideration to our Iraq proposals. Second, he is saying we cannot have any amendments to an over $400 billion continuing appropriation. Therefore, I object.

http://thomas.loc.gov/