Date: 1981-11-19
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I am Joining Senator SPECTER in offering this amendment. I believe he seeks to correct a very serious deficiency in the continuing resolution with respect to the Mine Safety and Health Administration. I would like to review for a moment how the continuing resolution affects the Mine Safety and Health Adiministrations mine safety enforcement program. This Joint resolution includes language on page 3 which reads as follows: (1) Whenever the amount which would be made available or the authority which would be granted uinder an Act listed In this subsection as passed the House as of Novcnibcr 20. 1081. Is different from that which would be available or granted uinder such Act as passed by the Senate as of November 20. 1081. the pertinent project or activity shiall be continued under the lesser amount or the more restrictive authority: Provided. That where an Item Is Included In only one version of an Act as passed by both Houses as of November 20. 1081. the pertinent project or activity shall be continued under the appropriation. fund. or authority granted by the one House. but at a rate for operations of the current rate or the rate permitted by the action of the one House. whichever Is lower. and uinder the authority and conditions provided in applicable appropriation Acts for the fiscal year 1981: Provided /urther. That for the purposes of this joint resolution. when an Act listed in this subsection has been reported to a House but not passed by that House as of November 20. 1081. It shnl he deemed as having been passed by that House: This language. I believe. is ambiguous. Depending on the Interpretation of the word "item" in line 8. one can construe this language to mean that the "more restrictive authority" is controlling or that authority applicable In fiscal year 1081 is controlling. I understand that conflicting Interpretations wvere delivered yesterday with respect to the effect of this language on Mine Safety and Health Administrations enforcement authorities. Also. I am told that the Office of Management and Budget has not been able to resolve Its interpretation of the effect on this language on MSHA. So I believe that Senator SPECTER Is doing us a service by clarifying the congressional Intent on this matter. Without Senator SPECTERS clarification I expect the issue would have to be settled later by the courts. Mr. President. the appropriations process Is clearly not the proper forum to make detailed changes in enforcement programs affecting the health and safety of miners. And. this continuing resolution is an especially imperfect vehicle to consider such a change. The resolution fails to offer any detailed legislative explanation which I believe should accom.pany congressional decisions. Where Is the legislative history behind the House language? I am not aware of any hearings which the Appropriations Committee has held on this subject. On the other hand. these very same matters are being discussed in the appropriate place right nlowthat Is Senator HATCHS Committee on Labor and Human Resources. S. 351 and other bills related to this matter have been reported out of subcommittee. I am told. To prohibit sand and gravel enforce- this matter carefully. We should let the Senate with respect to MSHA enment funding in MSHA would be a pre- them complete the record on this matter forcement responsibilities. emption of the authorizing committee. Therefore. I urge you to vote for the The authorizing committee is looking at before any recommendation is made to amendment offered by Senator SPECTER. EThe following proceedings occurred after midnight.] NOTICE Incomplete record of Senate proceedings. Senate proceedings for today will be conthiued in the next issue of the Record.