THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Doc Contents      

More importantly, these injuries cause terrible pain and suffering--as well as increased health care costs. OSHA's ergonomics standard is supported by overwhelming scientific evidence. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study concluded that workplace interventions can reduce the incidence of MSDs. When this study

[Page: S12175]  GPO's PDF

   Mr. President, ergonomics is also a women's issue. Women account for nearly 75% of lost work time due to carpal tunnel syndrome and 62% of lost time due to tendinitis. Many of the women affected by MSDs are in the health care industry, including nurses, nurse aides and health care aides. Women in the retail industry are also disproportionately affected by ergonomic injuries.

   I strongly urge my colleagues to help improve workplace safety by joining me in opposing this amendment. As a great nation, it is our duty to protect our most valuable resource--our working men and women.

   Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, for the information of my colleagues, we have been debating for the last hour or so--although we did have a discussion on the Wellstone amendment--the issue of the Bond amendment dealing with ergonomics. We have been debating it for a significant period of time. I personally am ready to vote on the amendment. I know there has been some discussion on both sides, but I ask unanimous consent that we have 30 additional minutes equally divided on the Bond amendment.

   Mr. REID. I object.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

   Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, again, I think most things have been said on this amendment that need to be said. I don't know if Members want more debate. I will make an additional request, and that is that we have 2 hours of debate on the Bond amendment equally divided.

   Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, I say to my friend from Oklahoma, this deserves some attention. We have 600,000 people a year who are injured as a result of these accidents. We had over 2,000 studies. The time is here to go forward with some rules and regulations t o protect American workers. I object.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

   Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, I will make one additional try. I ask unanimous consent that we have 4 hours equally divided on this bill.

   Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, I have been on the floor--this is the fifth or sixth day--trying to work with the majority to move this bill along. We have worked with the Members on the minority. We have moved a significant number of amendments, probably 65 or 70. We are to a point now where this bill could be completed but for this one contentious issue. From the very beginning, we have said this is an issue that deserves a lot of attention. We say, again, we are willing to work with the majority on this bill, but if this matter is here, we are going to have to discuss it. The American people, 600,000 a year, are injured with these accidents. It deserves more than 2 hours or 4 hours. I object.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

   The Senator from Pennsylvania.

   Mr. SPECTER. Senator KENNEDY.

   Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a minimum wage amendment be in order and that we have 1 hour of debate on that.

   Mr. NICKLES. I object.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

   The Senator from Pennsylvania.

   Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, in light of the fact that we are not going to get a time agreement on ergonomics, on the Bond amendment, in a moment I will move to table, as manager. First, I would like to move ahead on sequencing after the vote.

   I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from West Virginia, Mr. BYRD, be recognized at the conclusion of the vote and then, following Senator BYRD's statement, we move to the amendment to be offered by the Senator from New Hampshire, Mr. SMITH, so we will be on notice that that will be the next order

   of business.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Is there objection to the request?

   Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, is it the intention to withdraw the amendment, then, if it is not tabled?

   Mr. NICKLES. Let's have the vote.

   Mr. KENNEDY. Is it the intention to withdraw the amendment if it is not tabled?

   Mr. SPECTER. If I may respond to the Senator from Massachusetts, it is not my amendment, but it is my hope, as manager of the bill, that that would happen. But that is up to the offeror of the amendment.

   Mr. KENNEDY. Well, unless such is clear, I object.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

   Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I move to table the Bond amendment No. 1825 and ask for the yeas and nays.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?

   There appears to be a sufficient second.

   The yeas and nays were ordered.

   Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, was the unanimous consent request agreed to?

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. The request was objected to.

   Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of the vote, I be recognized for not to exceed 30 minutes to speak on another matter.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?

   Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator will have 30 minutes following the vote.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion to table.

   The clerk will call the roll.

   The legislative clerk called the roll.

   Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Connecticut (Mr. DODD) is absent because of family illness.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?

   The result was announced--yeas 2, nays 97, as follows:

   Jeffords

   Specter

   Abraham

   Akaka

   Allard

   Ashcroft

   Baucus

   Bayh

   Bennett

   Biden

   Bingaman

   Bond

   Boxer

   Breaux

   Brownback

   Bryan

   Bunning

   Burns

   Byrd

   Campbell

   Chafee

   Cleland

   Cochran

   Collins

   Conrad

   Coverdell

   Craig

   Crapo

   Daschle

   DeWine

   Domenici

   Dorgan

   Durbin

   Edwards

   Enzi

   Feingold

   Feinstein

   Fitzgerald

   Frist

   Gorton

   Graham

   Gramm

   Grams

   Grassley

   Gregg

   Hagel

   Harkin

   Hatch

   Helms

   Hollings

   Hutchinson

   Hutchison

   Inhofe

   Inouye

   Johnson

   Kennedy

   Kerrey

   Kerry

   Kohl

   Kyl

   Landrieu

   Lautenberg

   Leahy

   Levin

   Lieberman

   Lincoln

   Lott

   Lugar

   Mack

   McCain

   McConnell

   Mikulski

   Moynihan

   Murkowski

   Murray

   Nickles

   Reed

   Reid

   Robb

   Roberts

   Rockefeller

   Roth

   Santorum

   Sarbanes

   Schumer

   Sessions

   Shelby

   Smith (NH)

   Smith (OR)

   Snowe

   Stevens

   Thomas

   Thompson

   Thurmond

   Torricelli

   Voinovich

   Warner

   Wellstone

   Wyden

   Dodd

   The motion to table was rejected.

   Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, in view of the time that has been spent discussing this very important issue, and also the fact there have been several attempts to find ways to limit the debate, and now in view of the vote on the motion to table which was unanimous against tabling it, putting the Senate back to exactly the position we were in before, I think the thing to do at this time is to withdraw this amendment and move forward.

   I think that is a mistake. I want to say to one and all, this issue will be joined further, and we will find a way for the content of this amendment to be in some legislation and passed through the Congress this year.

   Mr. BOND. Mr. President, it has become clear to me that my amendment, which would force OSHA to do their job correctly instead of hastily, is a bigger concern to those on the other side than the wide range of benefits that the underlying Labor/HHS appropriations bill provides. This disappoints me tremendously.

   However, because the Labor/HHS appropriations bill will provide funding for so many programs that will help causes I support, I will not allow my amendment to prevent passage of this bill.

   By allowing OSHA to go forward at this moment, we are saying that it is

[Page: S12176]  GPO's PDF

   The heart of this issue is that although there have indeed been many studies conducted, they have not managed to answer the critical questions that employers need to know to be able to protect their employees: ``How much lifting is too much?'', How many repetitions are too many?'', and ``What interventions can an employer implement to protect his or her employees?'' This is what we mean by saying that there is not sufficient sound science to support this regulation.

   This regulation, whenever it comes out and takes effect, will be the most far reaching regulation ever issued by OSHA. It will be one of the most far reaching regulations f rom any agency and will ultimately effect every business in this country. To say that we will allow OSHA to proceed with a regulation of this nature, that we know is horribly flawed and without adequate scientific and medical support, borders on a dereliction of our duty.

   Many speakers opposed to my amendment have focused on the number of workers who are believed to be suffering from ergonomics i njuries. One of the great uncertainties about this issue is that we don't even know what it means to be in that group. That number includes many people who suffer from common problems like back pain which may or may not have any connection to the workplace. What constitutes a musculoskeletal disorder is one of those questions around which there is still no consensus within the medical and scientific communities.

   Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, OSHA has jurisdiction only over workplace safety questions. If the condition which represents a hazard is not part of the workplace, OSHA has no authority to compel an employer to address the problem. With ergonomics, there is no way for an employer to be able to tell when a condition has arisen because of exposures at the workplace or because of activities or conditions that have nothing to do with the workplace. Many factors such as age, physical condition, diet, weight, and even family history can influence whether someone is vulnerable to an ergonomic injury. We still don't know why two workers doing the same work for the same amount of time will have different experiences with injuries. It is simply beyond an employer's role and ability to ask them to determine how much of an injury may have been caused by factors outside their control. I do not believe that we should be telling employers that they should intrude into their employee's private lives to the degree that would be necessary to eliminate all possibility of suffering an ergonomic injury.

   I will continue to seek opportunities to come back to this issue because I believe so strongly that without sound science on this issue, OSHA's regulation on ergonomics w ill force many small businesses to choose between complying and staying in business. Under this decision everyone loses. However, in the interest of moving the Labor/HHS appropriations bill, I will allow my amendment to be withdrawn.

   AMENDMENT NO. 1825 WITHDRAWN

   Mr. LOTT. I ask unanimous consent that amendment 1825 be withdrawn.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

   The amendment (No. 1825) was withdrawn.

   The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.

THIS SEARCH     THIS DOCUMENT     THIS CR ISSUE     GO TO
Next Hit        Forward           Next Document     New CR Search
Prev Hit        Back              Prev Document     HomePage
Hit List        Best Sections     Daily Digest      Help
                Doc Contents