Unanimous Consent Requests

Floor Speech

UNANIMOUS-CONSENT REQUESTS -- (Senate - November 19, 2008)

Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that we move forward on this bill, S. 3689--there is a provision in that dealing with what we call FMAP--that the FMAP provision be taken out, that it be considered as separate legislation, be read three times and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and there be no intervening action or debate.

The reason that is so very important is that FMAP is something that every State--every State, all 50--is in desperate need of. No part of our country has proven immune from our economic struggles. We are all sharing the heavy burden of these difficult times. But few places are suffering, though, more than we are in Nevada.

Budget shortfalls in Nevada are causing deep cuts in bedrock programs the Government must provide, programs that help and protect children, senior citizens, and people with disabilities.

The State of Nevada has been forced to cap enrollment in Nevada Check-Up, our form of children's health insurance. The State recently had to institute cuts to provider reimbursement. What is worse, these cuts will not end here unless we act to provide fiscal relief by increasing the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage; that is, FMAP.

What are the consequences of inaction? It was reported in the media this weekend that due to the provider rate cut, University Medical Center in Las Vegas, our public hospital, is discontinuing outpatient cancer treatment. And that is not just for Medicaid patients, it is for all patients. It is not clear if all those patients will be able to afford chemotherapy elsewhere, but it is pretty clear they will not be able to.

Low-income children who need orthopedic treatment will have to leave Las Vegas altogether for services elsewhere. They will likely have to leave the State.

There is more to come. The cuts are not over. This is the way it is in many States around the country. The budget shortfalls are deep. When States have to cut provider reimbursement for some of the things I have outlined, they have real difficulties in making the safety net not be one that has big holes in it. States have found no choice but to look at cutting services such as mental health and cutting actual people from the program, adding to the ranks of the insured at the worst possible time.

We have been working in the Senate to provide help. The stimulus bill we introduced includes a temporary 8-percent FMAP increase to stave off these cuts. It will not fix the problem, but it may make a difference in ensuring that our children are not without the care they need. I hope we can take that step.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?

Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, reserving the right to object, this is a spending measure of $37.8 billion which has not been considered by the Finance Committee. We should be asking the States to pay it back. We should require the States to agree to not raise taxes. For all of those reasons, Madam President, I object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

Mr. REID. Madam President, I have one final consent request on which I would like to move forward. This is the matter dealing with automobiles. We know the issue before this body. There have been speeches given the last several days about where the automobile industry is. We have watched on national TV the congressional hearings that have taken place on this side of the Capitol and on the other side of the Capitol. We need to try to figure out some way to move forward.

We believe the best way to move forward is taking the money, as I have indicated, out of the so-called TARP money. I do not believe we need the legislation. I think--well, I don't know. I have talked to Secretary Paulson twice today. He knows he has authority to take money out of that; he just does not want to do it.

So I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of a bill I have at the desk, which is the text of title VI of S. 3689 regarding automotive industry assistance; that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and there be no intervening action or debate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?

Mr. KYL. Madam President, reserving the right to object, the longer this legislation has been lying around, the more objections have been heard to it. So, yes, I do object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

The Senator from Missouri.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, the distinguished majority leader was kind enough to mention the fact that several of us on our side have been working with leading Members on his side of the aisle to come up with a compromise proposal that would come to the aid of the auto companies which are facing a very serious situation, without mentioning specific ones or others, but to say this is a critical time to move to prevent perhaps the bankruptcy or the disappearance of a major auto company, which would cause chaos in our country. Over 3 million jobs are related to the auto industry--from the auto assembly plants, to the auto dealerships, to the parts suppliers.

So we have been working on a bipartisan basis. On my side of the aisle, Senator Voinovich and I have been working with others on the Democratic side. We took the basic construct of the measure the majority leader had introduced. We took the money out of a previously passed bill, which would not cause as much concern down Pennsylvania Avenue, and we provide that the money will go back into that program as it is returned.

In my view, it is essential we work something out. I will tell the majority leader we have made great progress. We are down to the point now where wording challenges are about the only remaining things to deal with. I strongly believe it is in the interest of the country, particularly all of those families whose jobs depend upon the auto industry, and the States, the local governments, and the Federal Government to move something forward.

So I ask unanimous consent that at a time to be determined on Thursday, November 20, the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of a bill to be introduced by Senators BOND and VOINOVICH and others; I further ask that there be no amendments in order, with 2 hours of debate equally divided, and following the use or yielding back of the time, the bill be read a third time and the Senate proceed to a vote on passage, and that if there are not 60 votes in the affirmative, the bill be placed on the Senate calendar.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?

Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, Madam President, we have had no hearings. We have no text. I know my friend, Senator Bond, is a man of faith. I think I am too. But this is carrying it a little too far. We do not know anything about this. I look forward to a piece of legislation we can look at. Hopefully, it can be done tonight or tomorrow, and we will be happy to look at it.

I have had many conversations today and yesterday with the senior Senator from the State of Kentucky, Mr. McConnell, and we understand the importance of this issue. We will try to work to move forward on it. But I want everyone to understand, no matter how hard we work, how hard we try, the House of Representatives is going home tomorrow. OK. They are leaving.

I understand the importance. But I would hope that in addition to understanding the importance, we have to face reality. The reality is, we have tried a number of different approaches.

I will be happy to look at the approach my friend from Missouri has. He is a hard-working Senator. I understand how hard he works. He is a real advocate for doing what he thinks is appropriate for his State and our country.

Senator Levin and I have had hours of conversation regarding this issue. Every conversation I have with him he mentions the name of the Senator from Missouri. So I understand what this is all about, but, recognizing we have had no hearings, we have no legislation, I object.

Source