Judd Gregg: “this proposal is a motion to instruct which has no binding effect and, thus, I assume Members are just going to vote the…”

“this proposal is a motion to instruct which has no binding effect and, thus, I assume Members are just going to vote the way they feel like voting. I will point out this: No. 1, the effect of this motion, if it had a binding effect, would be to take $3 billion away from the Federal Treasury and give it to specific companies in violation of a WTO ruling. It may have made sense at one time, but since the WTO ruling, it makes no sense. Because of that ruling, other companies are now being penalized inappropriately because we continue to assess this fine. No. 2, it is very hard for me to understand why, in a bill that is supposed to be reducing the deficit, we would want to increase the deficit by passing this type of instruction. Therefore, I oppose the motion to instruct. I yield back the remainder of my time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll. The Legislative Clerk called the roll. Mr. McCONNELL. The following Senators were necessarily absent: the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Santorum), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Isakson), and the Senator from Louisiana (Mr. Vitter). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Santorum) would have voted ``yea.''”