Thomas Daschle: “I am disappointed. I note the Senator from New Hampshire offered a sense-of-the-Senate resolution relating to Social…”

“I am disappointed. I note the Senator from New Hampshire offered a sense-of-the-Senate resolution relating to Social Security on the Commerce-State-Justice bill in the last Congress. There was no concern then about whether it was relevant or not. Our distinguished majority leader offered an amendment relating to prayer in schools and at memorial services on the juvenile justice bill last year. Again, there was no concern about relevance. Senator Helms offered an amendment that some of us may recall having to do with a patent for the Daughters of the Confederacy on the community service bill. He also offered a Lithuanian independence resolution on the Clean Air Act. Senator Nickles offered an amendment to require a supermajority for tax increases on the unemployment insurance extension. Senator Roth has offered tax cuts on appropriations bills. There is a lot of interesting history having to do with relevance and amendments that may or may not pertain directly to the bill under Senate consideration. That is all we are asking. What is even more noteworthy is the fact that we are willing to limit ourselves to 10 amendments with time limits. You can't do much better than that. What is good for the goose is good for the gander. If we could accommodate our distinguished colleagues in the past when they have offered amendments, certainly they should accommodate us. That is why the relevancy issue is so important here.”