On the recordMarch 13, 2001
we work in this body by unanimous consent, by agreement. The senior Senator from New York, in good faith, allowed the Senate to proceed on Thursday with the express agreement he would have a vote on his amendment. I know the good faith of the Senator from Texas. He believes, at least it is my understanding, that some of the subject matter in this amendment that the Senator from New York has brought is under the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee. That may be true. But the fact is, there was a gentleman's agreement in this Senate that Senator Schumer would have a vote on his amendment. I think it would set a bad tone in this bipartisan Senate if someone goes back on their word. When a manager of a bill is operating in the Senate, he is operating for the caucus that he represents--in this instance, Senator Grassley, one of the most senior Members, chairman of the Finance Committee. No one has been more heavily involved, with the possible exceptions of Senators Leahy and Hatch. I think we should get a time set to vote on the Schumer amendment. If my friend from Texas has an amendment, he should propose it. I think it will create a very difficult situation if someone such as Senator Schumer is told by a manager of the bill he will have a vote and suddenly that agreement is voided. That is, in effect, what is happening. It would set an extremely bad tone.
Source
govinfo.gov




