I suggest that we have been in the 104th Congress for 2 years. This legislation was introduced in the House some time ago. It would have been useful to us here in the U.S. Senate if this legislation had been before us prior to July 31. We would then have had time to hold committee hearings, which I think would have enabled us to make some corrections or additions or changes and to understand better the consequences of all the steps toward the goals we do support. I think it is not fair to say all of a sudden that, because a bill introduced right before the August recess has not yet been considered, that means it is something we do not care about. There was time in which the process could have moved forward, had the bill been introduced earlier.
Nancy Kassebaum: “I suggest that we have been in the 104th Congress for 2 years. This legislation was introduced in the House some time…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the timing and consideration of legislation in the Senate.
Share
More from Nancy Kassebaum
Regarding the Dorgan amendment, I would just say that I think we are better off the way things are than to try to develop a rigidity that I think would occur in the amendment offered by the Senator from North Dakota. It requires a…
I wish I could support the amendment of the Senator from North Dakota. I think there is still some difficulty with it that we need to consider, however. But I want to assure you that the TEAM Act does nothing to change the ability for…
This legislation will clarify the intent of Congress that health risk pools should not be subject to taxation.
Just to respond, we have considered this in the last Congress as well. We have not had a full-blown hearing but it is something Senator Metzenbaum, as part of the Labor Committee in the last Congress, raised. It has been under…





