Press Stakeout Following Senate Policy Luncheon
Federal News Service
HEADLINE: PRESS STAKEOUT WITH: SENATE MAJORITY LEADER BILL FRIST (R-TN); SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME); SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY); AND SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN (R-AZ) FOLLOWING SENATE POLICY LUNCHEON
LOCATION: THE OHIO CLOCK CORRIDOR, THE CAPITOL, WASHINGTON, D.C.
BODY:
SEN. FRIST: Good afternoon. On the floor of the United States Senate is one of the more important bills that we've had the opportunity to address over the last two years in the United States Congress. We're looking at major reform. It's not just in response to the 9/11 commission, but the 9/11 commission report did itemize and point out the very significant deficiencies that we as a Congress have a responsibility to respond to. It is playing out on the floor of the United States Senate now and. in all likelihood, the bill on the floor will pass tomorrow. We're in a period of 30 hours of debate. The clock will continue to run. Good debate, good amendment will continue to improve the bill.
I want to turn to the manager, who does need to get to the floor shortly, to make a brief statement, and then to Senator McCain, and we'd be happy to answer questions.
SEN. COLLINS: Thank you. I'm delighted with the very strong vote that we had this morning on cloture. It showed overwhelming support for completing action on this legislation and moving toward a final vote.
We have about 25 germane amendments that are now pending. We're starting to work through those amendments, and I'm hopeful that we can bring many of them to a vote today.
But I think that the strong vote for cloture signaled that the end is in sight for concluding this bill. And I'm very pleased that today we've been able to fend off all of the efforts to undermine the key provisions of the bill, and that includes creating a national intelligence director with strong authority. So I'm just delighted with how the debate has gone, and I can see a light at the end of the tunnel.
SEN. MCCAIN: I don't believe that over a week ago that anyone would have predicted the overwhelming cloture vote that was just achieved. And I think that the focus of our majority leader and our Democrat leader on this issue, and the leadership that Senator Collins and Senator Lieberman have displayed, have brought us very close, either tonight or sometime tomorrow.
As most of you know, the rules are that once the 30 hours expires, there can be votes on pending amendments, but it's over. And without getting too arcane, each member has only an hour each. It's not as if there's 30 hours that can be used by one member.
Then we'll take up congressional reorganization, and I'm very pleased that apparently, at least in the Senate, we're going to implement the 9/11 reforms of the executive branch.
I am very, very deeply disappointed about the congressional reorganization proposal as put forward by, strangely enough, two members of the Appropriations Committee, which leaves the power of the purse and the budget in the hands of the Appropriations Committee, which is directly contradictory to the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, which is to give the permanent Committee on Intelligence budgetary and appropriations power. We all know around here the golden rule-and if you don't have the power of appropriations, you don't have power.
SEN. FRIST: Let me see if there are questions for Senator Collins. I know she needs to get to the floor to manage the bill.
Yes?
Q The House -- (off mike) -- tomorrow, sort of planning a preemptive attack on the Senate bill, saying that it -- (off mike) -- it won't keep America safe as their version of the bill. And I'm curious to know from both of you sort of whether or not this is a thing of concern, that this is going to sort of poison the atmosphere --
SEN. FRIST: Yeah. The question is really about-the House has a bill and the Senate has a bill. And in the Senate, from day one-meaning after the 9/11 commission-we, working in a bipartisan way, the leadership and the-on the Democrats and leadership on the Republican side of the aisle, said that we're going to set a process. And that process was to begin hearings immediately, which the Governmental Affairs Committee and other committees did; two, as soon as we came back, address Homeland Security appropriations and then address this very important bill on the floor of the United States Senate. The process-and we've given plenty of time.
We are producing a Senate product which focuses on the safety and security of the American people by looking at major reorganization of the executive branch. The House is doing likewise, but they're doing it on a different-at a different pace and at a different rate and with a different timetable. Once they generate a bill and we generate a bill, we'll take it to conference and we'll work out those differences.
Q Aren't you concerned that this sort of adversarial position they're taking --
SEN. FRIST: From my standpoint and from the speaker's standpoint in my conversations with him, there is no-there is not an adversarial position. Both of us-and in talking with the speaker-are committed to generating a bill, and hopefully we'll be complete with the entire process and send a bill to the president.
There is some not time urgency, but timeliness to all of this because we will not be coming back to really address major pieces of legislation until next year, and that's why we're doing it now.
Q Are you going to get it done by --
SEN. FRIST: John, you want comment on House-Senate, House versus Senate?
SEN. MCCAIN: Well, one thing that's important here is that the White House has strongly supported the product here in the Senate, and I'm sure that the Republican leaders in the House will pay attention to the White House as well. And I believe that they have gradually but importantly changed their position to one where perhaps it should be done last year to a recognition that we need to do it this year. So I'm hopeful that once they complete their bill, we can get the conference done and if necessary maybe come back here for a half a day.
Q Senator Frist?
SEN. FRIST: Yes?
Q Speaking of differences, what do you think is a realistic timetable?
SEN. FRIST: Realistic timetable --
Q For a conference.
SEN. FRIST: -- for October 8, getting out of here, or on this bill?
Q No, on this bill.
SEN. FRIST: Yeah. First of all, overall timetable. October the 8th, this Friday, was the time that the Democratic leader and I have worked towards to have both intelligence reform issues fully addressed, and that is going to be possible in terms of having them both fully addressed. There are other issues that have to be dealt with that we can talk about here shortly.
For the bill on the floor, it looks like if there's an insistence on spending the full 30 hours' debate-we don't have to-that we would complete that bill tomorrow. The House will address their bill-I'm not setting their timetable, but it will be a couple of days later. So I suspect that we will immediately establish a conference, and it is my hope that conference can begin immediately, resolve the differences between the two bills, and then at some point bring that conference report back to each body. That would be sometime in October, and that's the-that's the general plans.
Q (Off mike.)
SEN. FRIST: And then to have the bill completed and then sent to the president.
Q Senator Frist, what about tobacco on the FSC/ETI bill-maybe Senator McConnell can listen to this, too, since you both come from tobacco states-is that going to blow up the bill, the FSC/ETI bill, in the end or not?
SEN. FRIST: Well, the-I'll have Mitch comment, but the FSC/ETI bill is in conference and huge progress has been made. It's been fascinating for me because two weeks ago people said it is impossible to deal with this bill, given the fact that the House bill and the Senate bill started as two very different bills. The progress that was made last night I think was substantial, again, just talking to the conferees today. I have not talked to any of the conferees over the course of today, so I'm not sure how much progress has been made. But I am very hopeful that the conference will complete its work, and that before we leave on October the 8th we will have a bill that can be voted upon by this body.
And then tobacco, do you want to comment?
SEN. MCCONNELL: Yes. Well, there is a likelihood that a tobacco buyout paid for by a manufacturers fee which also terminates the tobacco program will be in the final version. We don't know that for certain yet, but there is a likelihood of that. Obviously, if you're from a tobacco-growing state, like I am and like Senator Dole is, and others in the burley belt in the South and the flue-cured areas over in the Carolinas, this would be a good thing.
Q Do you anticipate having to (go to ?) cloture on the FSC/ETI conference report, or-I'm sorry, you don't have to go to cloture on a conference report.
SEN. MCCONNELL: You might. A conference report is subject to a filibuster if people want to do that. This is a bill that's supported by an awful lot of members of the Senate, both in the Democratic Party and in the Republican Party. I'm rather confident we would get cloture on the conference report if we had to.
Q Even if you don't have the FDA regulatory language?
SEN. MCCONNELL: As I said, there are a lot of things in this bill that are very popular with senators of both parties. And I think, you know, killing the conference report over the fact that something isn't in it is highly unlikely.
Q Have you spoken with Senator DeWine and Senator Kennedy, who said they would use every parliamentary maneuver if FDA is not in this bill?
SEN. MCCONNELL: They can speak for themselves as to what their intentions are. I was speculating about the popularity of the bill in the Senate. I think it's pretty widely popular.
Q Have you had any conversations with the Democratic leadership about --
SEN. MCCONNELL: I'm not going to characterize any conversations I may have had on this bill.
SEN. FRIST: And I've had conversations with them all. (Laughter.) Yeah, the bill itself, because it's-the FSC/ETI, jobs, transportation-or manufacturing bill, is a bill that I think Chairman Thomas, working with Chairman Grassley, is making huge progress, as I said. The House bill and the Senate bill were very different bills, but the process that they've laid out is one which essentially starts with core issues and allows amendments to change the bill. And you can't argue with the process.
There are a lot of people, a lot of people on our side and, I'm sure, on the Democratic side who are disappointed that their particular issue is not addressed. And to be honest with you, right now this is a Euro tax, it's 11 percent, it's going to go to 12 percent if we don't act, 13 percent and 14 percent before we even have the opportunity to act again. And I'm very hopeful because of that that people will step back, recognize that some other day they might have a chance to put their unrelated, un-germane, irrelevant amendment on. So I think the process is working well.
It's premature to say, until we see what the conference report is, after the process works out, as to whether or not it will be filibustered or people will try to block it.
Questions on other issues?
Q Senator Daschle was out here earlier and said he thinks the decision for the House to take up the Rangel bill to reinstitute the draft is just purely political. What is your take on what's happening?
SEN. FRIST: On the draft? We've got three days here. And I don't know whether it's political or not. I can tell you it's not going to be addressed in the United States Senate. And there's the Internet chatter out about draft, and from the leadership of the United States Senate it is a non-issue and it's one that's not going to be addressed.
Q What about reorganization?
SEN. FRIST: Yeah, reorganization within the Senate?
Q Right.
SEN. FRIST: We set out four weeks ago saying we were going to address the safety and security of the American people in terms of the intelligence reform. With that, we set up two avenues. One of them we've been talking about, the Collins-Lieberman bill. We'll complete that bill tomorrow, then we'll go to conference.
The other arm, which Senator McCain mentioned, is the product of-the product itself hasn't yet been taken to the floor, but the product of a task force of 22 members who, through the whips of both the Democrat side and the Republican side, under their leadership, are making a proposal to Senator Daschle and myself. That is what we will take to the floor of the United States Senate. It will be open to amendment. And although not everybody is going to agree with everything in that either, people will have the opportunity to modify. But the Senate will speak on the issue and we will address it before we leave.
And I just want to commend both whips-Senator McConnell and Senator Reid. This is a huge task. What we're asking our colleagues to do, all 100 of them, is to give up something for a greater good, and the greater good is the institution itself. And that is trying. It is tough. Around here, people's jurisdiction is power in the United States Senate. The appeal that Senator Daschle and I are making to our relative caucuses is that let's put the greater good of the institution, meaning the American people, above what individual interests might be and what one has to give up and another might gain.
So, again, I'll have Senator McConnell comment on where we are today. But I want to thank Senator McConnell and I want to thank Senator Reid for their leadership in what is probably the most challenging issue we're dealing with because you're talking about a lot in terms of egos, territory, sort of these provincial concerns of individual senators.
Mitch, do you want to comment on where we are?
SEN. MCCONNELL: Yeah, I think the only thing I would add, Bill, is that there are a few members of our conference that think we didn't go far enough, and there are a good many more than that that think we went too far. The proposal is certainly not set in stone, and it will be offered on the floor as a beginning place, and if people want to modify it, that's certainly perfectly all right. But the goal here is to simplify the process of oversight.
You might be interested to know that I was talking to Secretary Ridge yesterday. He said either he or his top people in his department had to make 164 hearings this year alone, and this year is not over. And they had to engage in 1,380 briefings. We need to simplify the lives of the people running the Department of Homeland Security rather than having them spend all of this time up here going around to the 88 different committees or subcommittees in the House and Senate or the 25 Senate committees or subcommittees that have some piece of this. And that's what this is all about, to simplify the process. Hopefully at the end of the day we will be able to achieve something that moves the ball in that direction.
Q Can you give us some --
Q What is your response to critics like Senator McCain who say this just preserves the status quo?
SEN. MCCONNELL: Senator McCain is going to offer an amendment, I'm sure he mentioned to you, that would go further than we went. There are others who would like to offer amendments that keep us from going as far as we've gone. As I said, when it comes to dealing with turf, there are always strong feelings, and our overall goal is to try to simplify the process. We'll have amendments. We'll have votes. And we'll see what it looks like at the end.
Q Can you give us a quick nutshell view of what's in your proposal?
SEN. MCCONNELL: Oh, gosh, I thought we did that yesterday. The summary of the proposal is out, and you can certainly get it from either Senator Reid's office or mine.
Thank you.