The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“THE PRESIDENT WILL NOT ASK SECRETARY O'LEARY TO RESIGN” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Energy was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H2564-H2577 on March 21, 1996.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
THE PRESIDENT WILL NOT ASK SECRETARY O'LEARY TO RESIGN
(Mr. TIAHRT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. TIAHRT. Madam Speaker, Vice President Gore, in his national performance review, indicated that Clinton's Secretary of Energy, Secretary O'Leary, and the Department of Energy, was 40 percent inefficient in their environmental management and it is going to cost the taxpayers $70 billion over the next 30 years.
Madam Speaker, what does that mean to taxpayers or what is that like? What is the equivalent of being 40 percent inefficient? That is like filling your car with gasoline, putting 10 gallons of it in, or running 10 gallons out of the pump and 4 of it goes on the ground and 6 of it goes in your tank. That is like sitting down at a restaurant, for every five bites you attempt to take, two of them end up in your lap. That is like sending your child to school and expecting your child to sleep for more than 2\1/2\ hours every day.
Forty percent inefficient, I think that is too much for the taxpayers. Seventy billion dollars, too much of a burden for the taxpayers. Yet it is condoned by Mr. Clinton. He will not call for reforms. He will not abolish the waste. He will not ask Secretary O'Leary to resign.
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 165, FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1996, AND WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 4(B) OF RULE XI WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED
FROM COMMITTEE ON RULES
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 386 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 386
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 165) making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1996, and for other purposes. The joint resolution shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit. The motion to recommit may include instructions only if offered by the minority leader or his designee.
Sec. 2. The requirement of clause 4(b) of rule XI for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is waived with respect to any resolution reported from that committee before April 1, 1996, and providing for consideration or disposition of any of the following measures.
(1) A bill making general appropriations for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996, any amendment thereto, any conference report thereon, or any amendment reported in disagreement from a conference thereon.
(2) A bill or joint resolution that includes provisions making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1996, any amendment thereto, any conference report thereon, or any amendment reported in disagreement from a conference thereon.
(3) A bill or joint resolution that includes provisions increasing or waiving (for a temporary period or otherwise) the public debt limit under section 3101(b) of title 31, United States Code, any amendment thereto, any conference report thereon, or any amendment reported in disagreement from a conference thereon.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). The gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost], pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During the consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 386 is a closed rule providing for consideration in the House with 1 hour of debate equally divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule orders the previous question to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit which, if containing instructions, may only be offered by the minority leader or his designee.
Section 2 of the proposed rule merely waives the requirement of clause 4(b) of rule 11 for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House for resolutions reported from the Rules Committee before April 1, 1996, under certain circumstances.
This narrow waiver will only apply to special rules providing for the consideration or disposition of any measures, amendments, conference reports, or items in disagreement from a conference that make general appropriations for fiscal year 1996, include provisions making continuing appropriations for fiscal year 1996, or any bill, or joint resolution, that includes provision increasing or waiving the public debt limit. The Rules Committee recognized the need for expedited procedures to bring these legislative measures forward as soon as possible. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 386 is straightforward, and it was reported by the Committee on Rules by voice vote.
In order to prevent a Government shutdown and provide the conferees on the omnibus continuing resolution adequate time to iron out the differences between the House, Senate, and administration, House Joint Resolution 165 is necessary. The legislation will keep the Government operating through March 29, and in the case of AFDC and the Foster Care Program through April 3. I urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 386 and the underlying legislation, House Joint Resolution 165.
{time} 1030
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this rule is proof positive that the Republican majority cannot finish the job they were sent to Washington to do. It seems to me that in addition to bringing about the revolution they have spoken of so often in the past 15 months, their responsibility, as the majority party, is to make sure that the trains run on time. Well, Mr. Speaker, not only have the trains not run on time in this Republican Congress, we have had to live through two major train wrecks, and now, nearly 7 months into fiscal year, most of the train is still off the tracks.
But, Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues have added insult to injury by asking this House to once again impose martial law. And what does martial law do, Mr. Speaker? Quite simply, martial law allows a majority to disregard the rules that they once so vigorously defended when they were in the minority. For 4 continuous months the House has operated under procedures that, had they been imposed by the Democrats, my Republican friends would have screamed bloody murder.
Today the Republican leadership plans to bring up the sixth martial law resolution of the 104th Congress. The resolution allows the Speaker to bypass the regular committee process and bring legislation immediately to the House floor without the normal 1-day layoff period required by the rules of the House. Usually this extraordinary authority is granted only in the final days of a session as adjournment approaches. But under, Republican control, the House has operated under martial law continuously for 4 months, from November 15 through March 15. Today they plan to extend that authority again until April 1.
In the Democratic 103d Congress the House operated under martial law for a total of 5 days with no martial law resolution lasting more than 1 day. In this Republican Congress a single martial law resolution, House Resolution 330, lasted 50 days. In the Democratic 103d Congress each martial law resolution applied to only one bill. Under the Republican control all martial law resolutions have applied to entire classes of bills encompassing everything from spending bills to Bosnia.
So, Mr. Speaker, I am going to make an offer my Republican colleagues should not be able to refuse. Let us go back to regular order and use the rules which have in previous Congresses served both the majority and the minority. Let us not circumvent the rules and undercut the democratic process in an effort to cover up the fact that the Republican majority cannot do its job.
I intend to oppose ordering the previous question in order to be able to offer an alternative rule which strikes the martial law provisions recommended by the Committee on Rules Republicans. I think that after 7 months of delay, if the Republican majority is serious about finally funding the Federal Government, the very least the Republican majority can do is offer the Members of the House the opportunity to take the time to read the bill. Martial law does not give anyone, Republican or Democrats, such an opportunity.
So I would encourage those Members across the aisle who are serious about maintaining democratic, with a small ``d,'' principles to vote again the previous question and to support my alternative to the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think initially here we need to clarify a couple of points.
Mr. Speaker, I think at the very initial stages here we need to correct or clarify some of the statements made by my respected friend, the gentleman from the State of Texas [Mr. Frost]. Circumvent the rules? I think the gentleman is confused. This is the rules. That is why we are down here today.
The gentleman and I were both in the Committee on Rules last night. The gentleman did not ask for two rules. We had a voice vote. I did not see this kind of vigorous debate in the Committee on Rules last night. This is kind of a blind side that we are getting down here.
What we are asking for is approval of a rule, and then from that rule let us go into the debate. Let us talk about he comes up with this magic phantom word called martial law. Again, in due respect to the gentleman from Texas, I call it economic common sense. What does he want to do? Stop the Government?
Of course, some leadership on the Democratic party would like to stop the Government because this is an election year. This is a very convenient time to try to put blame on the Republicans, who have brought more economic sense to this Government than any governing part of this body has brought for 40 years.
We have got some tough decisions to make here. We have got to move this thing forward. We have got negotiations going on between the administration, the President of the United States, between the U.S. Senate and between the U.S. House. We need to allow them some continued time for these kind of negotiations.
We are changing, Mr. Speaker, the habits of this House. We are changing 40 years, in my opinion, of bad habits. We cannot do it overnight. My colleague has got to allow the parties good faith, and he has got to allow them time so that these good-faith negotiations can continue. I do not think it helps the negotiations, it certainly does not help the relations between the two parties on this House floor, to use some of the types of exaggerations that I have just seen in the previous statement.
I would urge my colleagues, look beyond the political aspect of this, put aside the fact that we are in an election year right now, and let us move toward the best interests of this country, and that is called economic common sense.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
If I understand the previous speaker, he is generally making two points. One is that the ends justify the means; and, two, that democracy is a very dangerous thing. What law we are asking for is that this House follow the rules of this House that have been followed for years and years when Democrats were in the majority. The question is are we going to suspend the rules of the House and not require a 1-day layover, a simple 24-hour layover for the House to have a chance to read bills before bringing up a rule on the floor of the House. We very rarely did that when we were in the majority, and only at the end of a session, and only for 1 day at a time.
The new majority wants to suspend the rules of the House for 4 months. I guess they consider democracy very dangerous. The ends perhaps do justify the means in their view, not in mine.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let us again address the points from the fine gentleman from the State of Texas. We have got to have a bill by Friday. Does my colleague want to shut the Government down? We have to have a bill by Friday.
Now, I am sorry we cannot allow for time through next week and the following week to read some of the things that the gentleman would like to read. The fact is this Government continues second by second.
Now, we can either allow it to continue on Friday, or we can shut it down.
Now, today is Thursday. That means we have less than 24 hours, or about 24 hours, to do something to keep this Government operating. It is the Republicans' priority to keep the Government on course, but to run it on an economic course that is going to make common sense to the average taxpayer in this country, and that is a balanced budget.
Furthermore, I think it is important to understand that the waiver that we have talked about here, the narrow waiver, it is allowed by the rules. Suspension of the rules is a rule. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost] has many years of experience on the Committee on Rules; he is a very capable individual. He knows this is not undemocratic; that is how the rules are written. We are utilizing the rules. I would be called out of order, the Speaker would not allow me to continue this debate today, if it was not in the rules. If I am not authorized to be on this floor with this proposal, which, as the gentleman from Texas admitted, the Democrats used while they were in the majority, if I were not allowed to do that, it would not be in the rules. Of course it is allowed.
We have got to have this, Mr. Speaker. We have got to continue to allow this Government to operate in a fiscally sound manner.
Now, again it is a dramatic change in the last 40 years of leadership in this House. In the last 40 years of leadership in this House we have accumulated a debt that is about $38 million an hour. In other words, our Government right now is spending about $38 million an hour more than it is bringing in. We cannot do that. No country in the history of civilization, no free country in the history of civilization, has survived with the kind of economic factors that we now have in place the way this Government has been run the last 40 years.
The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost] knows it, the gentleman and the gentlewomen from all the 50 States in this Union know it. We have got to face up to fiscal reality, and that means that we have got to get some resolution, we have got to allow time for negotiations, and this rule allows it, and that joint resolution will allow the Government to operate in a commonsense, good judgment fashion.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior], the Democratic whip.
Mr. BONIOR. I thank the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost] for yielding the time this morning.
Mr. Speaker, the distinguished political analyst, Kevin Phillips, has said that this is the most unproductive Congress in the last 50 years. I have been here 20 years, and I have never seen this place run so poorly, so inefficiently, and without care and deliberation.
What this resolution we have before us does is say to virtually all Members of the Congress, at least the House, and all of the public,
``You can't participate.''
Now, what do we mean when we say martial law? The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost] has referred to this word, martial law. It means that the Speaker and the majority leader can bring legislation to this floor without going through the committee structure, without hearings, without giving us even a day's notice, bring it right to the floor, and we vote on it, and, as Mr. Frost has said earlier, this is being done for the fourth month in a row. Seventy-three percent of all the bills that have been brought to the House floor have gone right to the floor without committee consideration or approval this year, 73 percent.
Mr. Speaker, we started this Congress by shutting down voices, by closing the Black Caucus, the Women's Caucus, the Hispanic Caucus, and then there was an attack on public television, there was an attack on the Endowment for the Arts, closing down those important voices in our society, and now it has gotten to the point where Members of this body cannot even participate in committee hearings or committee votes, everything dumped right on the floor.
Mr. Speaker, the tragedy with this is it is not getting anything done. It is not getting anything done. This is the sixth martial law resolution we have had on the floor. We are going to be into our 12th continuing resolution in a few minutes.
{time} 1045
Yet, we still have not done five appropriation bills from the 1996 fiscal year. We are going backwards. We are not getting anything done. It is not me saying it, it is respected Republicans on the outside who are looking in and saying, ``What in God's name is going on up there?''
How does this affect the general public? When you stop and you go and you stop and you go in terms of these resolutions, you throw a lot of uncertainty out there into the public. School boards and school officials all across the country are trying to plan their school year in September. They are trying to figure out how many teachers they need next year, they are trying to figure out the curricula, they are trying to figure out class size. They cannot do that because we have not dealt with the education budget of this Nation from a Federal perspective.
The cuts that have been proposed by the Republicans have been in the neighborhood of $3.3 billion, cuts in the DARE Program, the Safe and Drug-free Schools Program, cuts in the Title I Program, which is for math and reading; 40,000 to 50,000 teachers getting pink-slipped all over the country, because they have not done their business.
This is a Congress of do little and delay. They have done little and they have delayed, and they have delayed. My friend, the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis], has had the nerve to stand up here and talk about shutting down the Government. They shut down the Government twice at the cost of $1.5 billion. That is what it costs to shut the Government down, $1.5 billion.
Mr. Speaker, there is a better way to run this place. The fair way to do it is to let the public participate, the Members participate, have up and down votes, give us a chance to offer the amendments that are necessary to keep our schools open, to take care of our toxic waste sites. We have toxic waste sites that are not being dealt with because they have not provided the money.
There is a better way to do this, Mr. Speaker. I ask my colleagues to vote against this rule, and to look closely at what the gentlemen on the other side of the aisle and the gentlewomen on the other side of the aisle are offering us in the 12th continuing resolution, which is closed for debate and for consideration by most of the Members of this body and by the American people.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, it is obvious from the previous remarks that we are into an election year. Let us look at the remarks made by the gentleman from Michigan. First of all, clearly, none of this would have happened, and I do not believe the gentleman's statistics are right. If 50,000 or 40,000 teachers got their pink slips because we said the Government had to operate with a balanced budget, maybe, if in fact that many got pink slips as a direct result of the negotiations here, it happened because President Clinton vetoed and vetoed and vetoed and vetoed and vetoed the budgets that we have given to him.
We are trying to get cooperation from this President. I can tell the Members, we have moved the President a long ways. Did Members ever think we would see this President saying that the era of big Government is over? Did we ever think we would see this President talking about a balanced budget? Finally we have gotten him to that point in the negotiations, but this takes time.
Mr. Speaker, let me point out, too, to assist the gentleman from Michigan, we have a Webster's dictionary up here. He keeps using this words ``martial law,'' as if the gentleman knows what it says. He is not using it in its proper context. Let me talk about martial law, as given to us by the Webster's dictionary: ``Martial law,'' ``The law temporarily imposed upon an area by State or national military forces,'' military forces, ``when civil authority is broken down, or during wartime military operations.''
If the gentleman wants to continue to use the term ``martial law,'' then he should clearly stand up here at the podium and talk about, under his definition of martial law, the times the Democrats used it in 1993. I have it right here. House Resolution 61, February 3, 1993, they did exactly the same thing. It is allowed under the rules. House Resolution 111, March 3, 1993, allowed under the rules. House Resolution 142, March 30, allowed under the rules, the same exact thing.
Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman and the gentlewomen from the other side there are trying to continue this argument, which clearly is a diversion from what we need to do, that is to cooperate towards a balanced budget, to cooperate keep this Government operating, if they want to continue to divert attention by using these terms, they should apply them to themselves. We are learning from them. We are using the rules. I could go on and on with this.
I think it is critical to understand that while the President has continued to veto, veto, veto, veto, and veto, we must, as a result of those vetoes, continue to negotiate, negotiate, negotiate, and negotiate. Do Members know what is going to happen as a result of those negotiations? At some point we are going to reach a compromise, a compromise that is good for the American people.
I know the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior], and I must say right off the bat, I am not educated at an Ivy League school. I went to a very small school in the mountains of Colorado. I think I am very capable, but not able to quote great scholars. He quotes a distinguished scholar about his analysis of what is happening here in the U.S. House.
Let me quote a couple of people: My buddy Al. He is a rancher, he is not an Ivy League graduate, but do you know what he analyzed? He said
``It is about time, it is about time that somebody insisted that this Government, that this Congress, run its budget like every average American citizen has to do. It is about time somebody had enough guts to stand up to the bureaucracy in Washington, D.C. and demand that a balanced budget be in place. It is about time somebody called the President on these vetoes after veto after veto.''
Those are the kinds of quotes I can give. I can talk about Linda, I can talk about Betsy. These are just common folk out there. They know what it means to have a balanced budget. They have to balance their checkbook. So let us not use these diversionary tactics, first of all, by using this term ``martial law,'' unless, of course, you want to apply it to yourselves, as you used it for the last several years.
Let us talk about unity in working towards a balanced budget to bring this Government to an economic, sensible, type of plan that will move us forward in a positive fashion.
Mr. Speaker, let me say that sometimes it is easy for people who observe us debating on this floor to go away with a pretty pessimistic attitude. I am optimistic about the future of this country. I think we have a great future ahead of us. But we do have some responsibilities that we have to carry forward, so the greatness of this country can continue. Those responsibilities right now center on fiscal responsibility. In order for us to get to that fiscal responsibility, we need to pass this rule.
Mr. Speaker, I should point out once again, and again, we can tell it is an election year. We were just in the Committee on Rules last night, so I have lost my memory on what occurred. We did not see this kind of rancor last night. We did not see this kind of debate in the Committee on Rules. In fact, this passed on a voice vote. Do Members know why? Because it is a procedure that has been used in the past, it is a procedure that is necessary to keep this Government from shutting down by tomorrow. I urge that Members support the rule. I urge that we support the House joint resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, what we have before us today is conclusive proof that the governing Republican majority in this Congress is both incompetent and does not care about democracy. The gentleman just mentioned that Democrats suspended the rules during the last Congress. We did that for 5 days on five different occasions, 1 day at a time. They have done it for 4 months now, and they want to do it even longer than that. There is a basic disagreement on democracy, on how we should function as a democratic institution.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Nadler].
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, the remarks of the gentleman from Colorado are irrelevant . . . He talks about the suspension of the rules, as if----
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask that the words be stricken, the words of the gentleman be stricken.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I did not refer to the gentleman in any way. I said his remarks.
Mr. McINNIS. The gentleman referred to the gentleman from Colorado. I ask that those words be stricken.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I said those remarks were . . . I did not say he was.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. Burton of Indiana). The gentleman will suspend. The gentleman will be seated.
The Clerk will report the words.
{time} 1055
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, rather than waste time, I will withdraw the remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman withdraws the remarks.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York may proceed in order.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, let me say that most of what the gentleman from Colorado was saying is irrelevant to the point that we are making. The relevance of the balanced budget, the merits of the economics of both sides of the House and of the President are not what is at issue here. What is at issue is an abuse of the rules of the House.
The procedure for suspending the rules and what we call martial law is for an emergency. Instead, it is being used for every single day of this Congress, every single day of this Congress, not to give Members the right to read the bills, to have a bill on the floor without a 1-
day layover so we can read them and look at them, to take bills away from committees, put them on the floor without consideration. In an emergency, maybe. The gentleman says it is an emergency. The Government will shut down unless there is a continuing resolution.
No. 1, why do we not have a continuing resolution, instead of lasting a week or two, that lasts until a budget agreement is reached or for the balance of the year? But forgetting that, if that is the emergency, why does the gentleman not ask for a rule that suspends the 1-day rule for 1 day for this bill? Not for another few weeks and keep it going that way.
The gentleman says it is within the rules to suspend the rules. Of course. There is that emergency provision, but this is an abuse of it. Lots of things can be done legally. The Reichstag passed the Enabling Act to give certain powers to the chancellor legally. That was an abuse of an emergency provision. Look what it led to.
I do not compare this to that, but it is the same abuse that eliminates democratic procedures. There is no necessity for it. Let them have a 1-day suspension, if necessary, so we can do this continuing resolution that is made necessary by the irresponsibility of the Republicans by not bringing it up earlier and by refusing lengthy CR's.
But let us not let that excuse be used to say we need to suspend the rules so that the Speaker can at any time bypass the committee, bring brand new legislation to the floor without even a day for Members to read it and a day for the Members of the public to read it. That, sir is an abuse of the Members and of the public.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I certainly respect the comments from the gentleman from New York, and I think that his point is a valid point. It is that exact reasoning from the gentleman from New York that the Democrats, when they were running this House floor and they had control of the Rules Committee, used exactly what he is talking about, using the word ``emergency.''
Let me refer the gentleman from New York to House Resolution 111, this is March 3, 1993, relating to the emergency unemployment compensation. We can go on from there to House Resolution 150 on March 30, 1993, making emergency appropriations. We can move on from there to House Resolution 153, making emergency appropriations, so on and so forth.
Mr. Speaker, I am going to try and pull us back. I would love to engage in debate with the gentlemen from the other side of the aisle. I think it is exciting. But the fact is we have got to get on with business. The fact is we need to keep this Government up and operating. The fact is we need to operate this Government in an economic, fiscally sane way. So let us pull it back to where we are today.
What are we debating right now? We are debating a rule. This is not the first time that this rule has been debated. In the past this rule has been utilized when the Democrats controlled the chair up there, and now the Republicans intend to use this rule. We need to have it.
Yesterday we debated this rule in the Rules Committee. We did not see this kind of vigorous debate in the Rules Committee. The only time we have seen this kind of vigorous debate is when we are down here on the House floor. Because up in the Rules Committee, we know that we have got to cooperate to keep this Government open tomorrow. That is what we are down to. We are down to 1 day. We are down to 24 hours.
Some would say, well, why did you let it get this close? The fact is very simple. We have got good-faith negotiations going on right now between the administration, between the Senate and between the House.
We can shortcut those negotiations. If we do, it is going to shortcut all of us. It is going to fall way short of a goal that I think, once we put the politics aside, once we put the election year aside, a goal that we want, for this country to be fiscally sound.
We should support this rule. This rule is important for us to move on. As I said, and again I stress this, this rule has been used in the past when the Democrats headed the Rules Committee, and we are using it today. It is not a subversion of democratic procedure. It is an allowed rule up there. The reason for it is for the very kind of circumstances that we face today.
The option, of course, is to go ahead, vote down the rule, as has been proposed by some Members who have taken the opposite stance of mine, and close down the Government tomorrow. We do not think it is necessary to close down the Government tomorrow.
We think you should support this rule and help us keep the Government open. We think your idea of closing down the Government by voting down this rule is not a good idea. It does not make sense. Work with us on this. Help us keep this Government operating for the next few days while the negotiations continue.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Wise].
Mr. WISE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Colorado movingly referred a moment or two ago to his friends in Colorado who speak common sense and my friends, Betsy and Al and others, are of much the same mind. They know a couple of things, too. They know people have to pay their bills on time, and they sure hate it when they lose their job because somebody else did not do their job. That is what this debate is about.
There is a lot of talk about martial law and whether it is an unusual remedy. It depends on the circumstances. Yes, Democrats did use it for 5 days over a 2-year period and then limited it to one bill at a time. In the Republican majority in this Congress, not yet finished, they have used it for 4 months and covered whole classes of bills.
The definition of an emergency is interesting. They are approaching the definition of emergency about as long as Fidel Castro and Chiang Kai-shek and Generalissimo Franco used their definitions of emergency.
Because what is this martial law resolution? It permits you to skip committees, it permits you to avoid 1-day layovers so Members can read bills. It sets up a situation so your representatives do not know what is in those bills when they vote on them. This is a very, very serious matter. Now they want another one, the 11th this year, to go until April 1, not 1 day, not one bill, April 1.
The gentleman from Colorado speaks about economic common sense. Let us talk about common sense, economic common sense. We are 6 months into the 1996 budget year. Incidentally, they are already trying to work up the 1997 budget even though we do not have a 1996 budget yet. We are 6 months into the 1996 budget year. There have been 11 temporary spending resolutions and another 2 weeks of uncertainty coming up. This is businesslike?
Because the Republican leadership cannot operate the House and cannot agree on a budget, others must suffer. When this next continuing resolution expires on April 1, the West Virginia school boards, 55 of them, will have had to have laid off 226 teachers, 90 aides and denied title I reading and math services to 6,500 students. That is economic common sense, I ask you?
The gentleman says that economic common sense is necessary. What kind of economic common sense is it that costs teachers, that costs parents, that costs children these opportunities, and is only going to suffer more setbacks?
Let me talk about why they want martial law or why I believe that what happens because of martial law, because nobody knows what will be in the bills that come to the floor. Understandably, they do not know yet. They have not written them. They do not know yet what is in them. But I have to be honest, given what has come in the past, I would not want to know what is in them, either, because it is just better that way.
What finally bothers me is when I hear this analogy that somehow if we do not vote for this, we are 2 days away from the deadline and you are going to shut the Government down.
I tried that in my school, too. It does not matter what school you went to, we all tried the same thing. I would go to the teacher and I would say, ``You know, 2 days, I didn't have enough time.'' The teacher would say, ``Yeah, Bob, but you had 6 months to work on this budget.''
Actually you had a year because you were supposed to have started a year before. I am not impressed and I do not think the American people are impressed, either. That is why this martial law is not good for the Congress and not good for the democracy.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The gentleman from West Virginia is an excellent speaker. He presents his points well, but I think we need to look at the substance of the points.
First of all, one of the points that the gentleman from West Virginia says, ``Hey, we're 6 months into this process and we still don't have an agreement.'' I will tell you why we do not have an agreement, is because of that veto pen down there at the White House, veto, veto, veto, veto.
When you talk about the difficulties that we have had on a compromise up here, you should also point out, to be fair to all parties listening to this debate, that there are three parties in this negotiation: The administration, President Clinton; the U.S. Senate; and the U.S. House. On some occasions the U.S. House and the U.S. Senate have come to a compromise and it has been the administration which has vetoed these bills and caused this kind of delay.
But let me also say, in fairness to the economic history of the last 40 years, it does make economic sense, if necessary, to delay this process if we can move this country toward a balanced budget, if we can get this country to quit spending more than it brings in.
Sure, you can look at the record of the last 40 years and say there were not very many times, if any, and I do not know that history for sure, but even if there were not any times that they went 6 months beyond that deadline, take a look at the product that we got. The product that we have got is a government that spends $40 million an hour on its debt more than it brings in. The product we have got is it now requires every man, woman, and child in this country to pick up
$18,000 on their share of what is going to be necessary to get us out of debt.
It is kind of like running a credit card. Most of us have credit cards. Sure, if you can continue to use the credit card and charge and charge and charge and charge, and nobody ever calls you on it or nobody ever forces you to pay up the bill, then it is pretty easy not to delay buying something because you do not have the money. You just go down and charge it. That is what has happened for 40 years. Now before we let you use the charge card, we are saying, ``Wait a minute. Look at how much we owe on the charge card.''
Certainly we are going to have to spend some money. Obviously education is a priority for all of us. Obviously we have to have a defense. But we need to spend the money more efficiently. Before we just go down and willy-nilly charge anything we want, we have got to be careful with that credit card. That is what we are saying. That is what these negotiations are about.
I think further, let me say to the gentleman from West Virginia, he continues to use the words ``martial law,'' but at least the gentleman from West Virginia also applied that term when the Democrats had the Rules Committee. I would venture to say to the gentleman from West Virginia, the Democrats did not use martial law when they utilized this rule. We are not using martial law by utilization of this rule.
I read the definition over here from Webster's dictionary, martial law, which involves military forces. It is the utilization of the rules to get us to a common point. That common point, which you are coming to very resistantly, and you are tugging and you are pulling getting to that point but you are moving to that point, is a balanced budget for this country. I think that is the essence of what we have to get to.
You say we misuse the title of emergency. Well, folks, we are going to have an emergency in 24 hours. The clock is ticking. It is ticking second by second. That clock right up there, 24 hours from today, if you do not cooperate with us, you are going to shut this Government down.
We do not want the Government shut down. We want a government that is going to operate in an efficient manner and we are asking for your cooperation to give us some more time for good-faith negotiations. Is that too much to ask from you? I do not think so.
Last night when we were in the Rules Committee, they did not think so. We did not have this kind of argument last night in Rules. Let us pass this rule, let us get a good, healthy debate on the floor and let us keep the Government open.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Doggett].
Mr. DOGGETT. Well, you may not want it shut down this morning, but you were mighty proud to shut it down twice last year. You use this term ``civil disorder.'' You say that martial law is something that we bring into play when there is civil disorder.
Well, what better term to describe the mess that you have made of this Government? Coming to the American people and bragging about your power to shut down the Government, not once but twice, costing the American taxpayer $1.5 billion, frittered away by this Republican leadership, totally and completely wasted so that they could have their Government shutdowns. What do they propose today? Well, they want to erect a monument to the mismanagement, to the failures of this Gingrich Congress.
This year after those two Government shutdowns, what have they given us? Loud talk and long weekends. It took them 3 weeks to celebrate Valentine's Day, breaking from this Congress. They come in and they break a little after noon.
There are people across America that these Republican colleagues of ours simply do not understand. They are working families. They are facing a tough time trying to make ends meet. If they for 1 week were to handle their business in the total mismanagement fashion of our Republican colleagues, taking 5 and 6-day weekends, taking 3 weeks for Valentine's Day, working part-time, asking to be paid full time, and caring about the real problems of the American people no time, then those ordinary working families would be out without a job in their own situation.
At the same time, we find ourselves in these sputtering spurts of Government that occur here with the same kind of extremist rhetoric that we heard all of last year from day one. When Republicans over in the other body hear the cry of the American people and approve money so that we can keep Head Start going instead of giving our young children a wrong start, keep our teachers going with Federal support of education, the response from the House Republican leadership is that the Senate Republicans have somehow been spineless, rather than to commend them for their willingness to finally come around and listen to the American people.
There are programs for young people in this country that are going to be shut down unless this kind of extremism can be put to a halt. We got just this week another example of that same kind of extremism, where we have one Member of this body coming and saying that he heard right here in the House a great Republican say, `` `I trust Hamas more than I trust my own government.' Those words hurt.''
They do indeed hurt, and they hurt not just the pride of this body. They hurt ordinary working families across this country, because they are the ones that are being savaged, that are being impacted by this kind of extremism in the House that has the Government operating literally from 1 day to the next, without the planning that our local school boards need and our Government agencies need to do their job.
{time} 1115
So what is proposed as a solution? What this rule does is to say they think the solution to it all is to do one thing: Give Speaker Newt Gingrich more power. I do not believe the American people think the Speaker needs more power. I think they view him as part of the problem instead of part of the solution.
This allows him to come forward with more sneak attacks, just like tomorrow. Every time the American people realize what is happening to them, they come up with some sneak attack and some distraction piece of legislation. There is only one good feature of this resolution that our Republican colleagues are offering, and that is this authority is going to expire on April 1. Yes, they quite appropriately picked April Fools' Day. I say the American people are not going to be fooled again by this kind of nonsense.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I find it somewhat amusing that the gentleman defines a sneak attack as an attack that comes tomorrow. That is not too sneaky if it is coming tomorrow.
Second of all, the gentleman talks about how the Republicans have stretched Valentine's Day for 3 weeks. I would let the gentleman from Texas know, I actually got to spend Valentine's Day with my wife, and I wish I could have figured out how to stretch that for 3 weeks, because it was a wonderful day.
Let us get back to the rule here. You want to vote against this rule, then you want to shut down the Government. That is how simple the choice is. It is the bottom line. We can talk about quotes here and there, and we can bring in posters and jump up and down and talk about all these kind of things. But the fact is, if you want to vote against the rule, you vote to shut the Government down tomorrow. No way around it. It is that simple. If you vote against the rule, you shut down the Government tomorrow.
I do not think that is what you really want to do. I think what you really want to do is cause a little havoc, and that is certainly within the debate here. I do not think that is going to get us anywhere. I think we have to pull back, unify, and work towards a balanced budget. You talk about the word ``extreme,'' this word ``extreme.'' What I think most Americans would define as extreme is that you up here, some of you, decide to vote against a rule, this is a procedure, a procedure that has been used by the Democrats, a procedure used by the Republicans, that you would vote against a rule just to demonstrate a point to shut down the Government tomorrow.
Do not shut it down. You do not need to shut the Government down tomorrow. That would be an extreme move. I would hope that the gentleman from Texas votes for this rule, because if you do not vote for the rule, then I think the next logical step is using the definition of the word ``extreme.'' It shuts the Government down.
Again, let me remind my colleagues, last night when we were in the Committee on Rules, we did not have this kind of debate. The members of the Committee on Rules on both sides of the aisle understood that we need to continue to operate the Government. They understood that we can operate in a positive fashion. Now we have got a little insurgence, coming over here today saying, hey, this is a bad rule. For some reason, we could use the rule, but you cannot use the rule. We see all these kinds of words being used, ``extreme, extreme, extreme.''
I would suggest we use the words ``veto, veto, veto,'' and once we are through with that debate, let us get to the issue at hand, and that is to vote ``yes'' on this rule so we can keep the Government from closing down tomorrow.
This is serious business. If we do not pass this rule, this Government is shutting down tomorrow. So let me urge all of my colleagues, let me say to you, Democrats, if you really want to push it, you may win the battle, you may beat the rule, but you are going to lose the war. And who loses if you lose? We all lose. Tomorrow we have got to keep this Government operating. There is no reason. In the past there has been, I think, logical argument on both sides that you have to bring an operation to halt that is spending $38 million an hour more than it brings in. But tomorrow, you do not have that kind of justification. You do not need to shut this Government down. Vote
``yes'' on this rule and keep the Government in operation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
Mr. Speaker, my colleague on the other side of the aisle is a little confused. I have listened to him and listened to him and tried to understand what he is saying. He obviously is confused. Let me see if I can set it straight.
We are not suggesting that the CR should not be brought up. The CR will be brought up today, should be brought up today, even under what we are suggesting. The only thing that we are asking is that the martial law provision of this rule be stripped out. Strip that out, you still bring the CR up today, because the CR is laid over 24 hours. That is all we are asking.
The gentleman seems to be very, very confused. He seems to think that if we won the previous question and we were able to strip out the martial law provision, that the CR could not come up. That is not the case at all. The CR would come up. It would be the next order of business.
I guess perhaps the staff on the other side may explain that to the gentleman, that even if we win, that the CR will be voted on today. I know it is a little hard to follow, what goes on around this place sometimes, but we are not suggesting the CR should not be brought up. We are suggesting it should be brought up, voted on today, so the Government can stay open.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro].
Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, today what we are seeing and what we are listening to is another consequence of the incompetence of those who run this House. The resolution that we debate will grant Speaker Gingrich extraordinary powers to bypass the regular process of this body and to bring bills immediately to the floor. What does this mean? No time to read the bills, no time to understand what is being voted on, no time for committees to air the process.
It is a subterfuge, a way in which you want to hide what you truly want to do.
We have precedent here: The Medicare debate, its Medicare debate, one hearing on dismantling the Medicare Program, which serves 99 percent of the seniors in this Nation. However, we were able to expose what our Republican colleagues wanted to do about Medicare, and now they have backed off of that issue.
This is a subterfuge tactic to hide what they want to do. The incompetent management has consequences in the lives of working families. Medicare is an example. As we lurch now from one short-term spending bill to another, citizens, businesses, have no idea what the Federal Government is about. My State of Connecticut, the educators are contemplating cutting reading, writing, mathematics programs, for our kids, the programs that talk about making our schools safe for our kids, providing the opportunity for high school students through school to work to be able to move into a profession. College loans will be cut. They do not know in my State of Connecticut what the Federal Government wants to do in funding for education. They are unable to plan for the school year.
I say to my colleague from Colorado that your friend Al's children are in serious jeopardy. Let us not give Newt Gingrich any more powers. Let us do the people's business, pass a budget that reflects the values and priorities of this Nation.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I do find the previous Speaker's comments entertaining, but I think it is important for us to address the comments of substance, and those are the comments from the gentleman from Texas. The gentleman from Texas is correct, I am confused, because last night in the Committee on Rules, we offered two separate rules specifically to the gentleman from Texas. I remember his comments. I was there. I was right opposite him. We said to the gentleman from Texas, ``Mr. Frost, would you like two rules?'' The answer was no.
Now, why two rules? One rule, if you are having a problem with the waiver of the bill, then we will give you a separate rule on the continuing resolution which will stop the Government from shutting down tomorrow. Then you can have a separate rule on this debate on the waiver or on the procedure we are using.
The gentleman from Texas said no. Now I am confused. If he is not attempting to shut down the Government tomorrow, why did he not ask for separate rules last night? It is very clear. The fact is, there is a little game playing going on here. That is OK. We are in a debate. But it gets real, real serious here in about 24 hours. You are going to shut down that Government if you vote ``no'' on this rule.
Last night, if you were really serious about your objections to the waiver we have requested, you should have asked, you had the opportunity to ask, and you did not ask, for a separate rule. You could have had a separate rule. You did not ask. You did not go after it for the continuing resolution.
Then maybe some of the comments you would have made would have had more merit to me. As we stand right now, we are playing, again as I say, a very serious game with the lives of 240 million Americans when we do not need to. We do not need to shut down the Government tomorrow. We are not at that point in a crisis. We are not at that point in our negotiations where it requires a shutdown, where we walk off the job. Let us stay on the job. The way we stay on the job is you vote ``yes'' on this rule. If you want to shut down the Government, then go ahead with this game playing, vote ``no'' on the rule, and then we will see who is confused tomorrow night at about midnight.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon [Ms. Furse].
Ms. FURSE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today against this closed rule. This is just another example of this 2-year experiment, which we have to call the Republican control of Congress. I think in order to evaluate this experiment, we need certain things. We need to look at issues and numbers.
The first issue is priorities. This Republican Congress wants to cut
$3 billion this year from education. Another number, 22. It has decided, this Republican Congress, to cut 22 percent of the environmental protection moneys. That is the protection for health for our children.
Another issue, failures. Another number, 11. This Republican Congress has tried to shut down the Government, or actually failed to keep the Government going, 11 times.
Now, in 208 years, that has never happened before. The U.S. Congress has never threatened to shut down the Government 11 times.
Another failure is five, and another number, five. That is the number of appropriations bills from last year that have not yet been passed this year.
Value, what about value? Well, there is the number 133,000. That is what Members of Congress get paid in order to run the Government, in order to do their job. Well, I would say that the Republican majority has not been able to do its job, so I would say that the American public really has not got their money's worth from this Republican control of Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I rise against this closed rule, another closed rule, and I rise against the priorities of this Republican Congress.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, to the gentlewoman, let me tell you, there is a big priority right here in front of you, it is in front of me, and it is in front of every one of our colleagues, and that is if you do not vote on this rule and we lose the rule and we shut down the Government tomorrow, that should not be the priority, the shutdown of the Government. We do not need it. The negotiations are not there.
Our priority, the Republican leadership's priority, is to try to keep this Government operating. Now we are trying to negotiate in good faith with the President. All we get is veto, veto, veto, veto, veto, veto, veto, but we think we can negotiate something. We think we should continue the good faith negotiation.
We do not think you need to shut down the Government tomorrow to prove your point that you are displeased with the Committee on Rules. If you are unhappy with the Committee on Rules, come up and have your representative on the Committee on Rules entertain a motion.
Certainly yesterday the members of the Democratic Party on the Committee on Rules had every right, they did not do it, they could have done it, but they did not do it, to offer a motion to have two separate rules. In fact, it was members of the Republican side of the aisle on the Committee on Rules that asked the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost], on the Democrat side, would they like two separate rules? The answer was no.
I will tell Members, the cooperation last night in the Committee on Rules was good. It was excellent. But you cannot hardly believe in less than 24 hours the cooperation we saw upstairs in the Committee on Rules has developed into this. There has not been any tough negotiations or disagreements between us in the last 12 hours. What brought this on?
Come on folks. We have got to keep this Government going. We can do it. Vote ``yes'' on this rule. It is absolutely essential if we want to keep the Government operating.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank].
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I sympathize with the gentleman from Colorado. He has been left all alone on his side to defend this latest trampling of open procedures, and he is a little testy because he apparently thought he had a nice deal worked out last night and democracy has broken out on the floor of the House. I understand that is unsettling, but he has to learn to live with it.
On the other hand, I want to give him credit. Some people think others do not learn things. Clearly he at least has learned that shutting down the Government is a terrible idea. He has several times today talked about how outrageous it is to shut down the Government. One would not infer from that he is part of the majority that made a habit of shutting down the Government as a deliberate tactic. People boasted about shutting down the Government.
Well, they have learned that was not a good thing and the gentleman from Colorado has the zeal of a convert against shutting down the Government. He has joined Government-shutters-down-anonymous. We are on a 12-step program. Unfortunately, it does not include democracy.
What we are being told here is you may not continue to debate these issues openly. You may not have the rules which say you got to wait a day so we can study this big thing. He says you better do this in a hurry or we will shut the Government down.
Why is that the case? Because the Republican majority has not been able to run the place sufficiently to give us enough time. So, yes, they have created an emergency from which they now want to profit.
They are asking us to sacrifice democratic procedures on the altar of their own incompetence. I agree, it is an imposing altar. I have never seen incompetence so dazzlingly displayed. But I do not think that is a justification for shutting down fair procedures.
What is their justification? ``Well, you guys did it, too. You guys did it.'' Every time we talk about one more procedural outrage, they go to the history books and they say ``Hey, the Democrats once did that.''
Well, as I recall, the Republicans ran in 1994 on a slogan of ``Throw the bums out. They have run the House unfairly, they have been undemocratic.'' Speaker Gingrich, whe he was still Speaker, before he kind of deposed himself and put Armey in charge, he used to talk about that.
Now what do we have? Every time the Republicans get in a bind because of their own incompetence, they decide to do some shortcut that they used to attack us for. So they used to run on the slogan ``Throw the bums out.'' Then they decided to take power and emulate us, and this year apparently their slogan for reelection will be, ``Keep the bums in.''
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I think there ought to be a new song and dance out there called veto and spend, veto and spend, veto and spend. The gentleman ought to mention a little of that in his comments, the gentleman from Massachusetts.
But let me also say to the gentleman from Massachusetts, I respect his compliment that I have unilaterally had to take on speaker after speaker after speaker here for the last hour. Bring on your best. I think I can handle it. I am ready for it.
The issue here is not whether or not we have had a great debate in the last hour, and I think we have. Certainly it has been somewhat entertaining. The fact is this: If we do not pass this rule, if we carry through with the gentleman's comments to vote no on this rule and this rule loses, we will close this Government down tomorrow.
{time} 1130
As I have said, there are times where it may be necessary to close down the Government for a temporary period of time. This is not one of those times. My colleagues do not need to bring this battle upon themselves. Do not do it. Do not do it to the American people.
Vote ``yes'' on this rule and keep that Government operating tomorrow. I can tell the Republicans intend to vote ``yes'' on this rule. We do not think it is time to close down the Government, and we urge them to reconsider their strategy of closing down the Government tomorrow. Do not do it. Vote ``yes'' on the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Volkmer].
(Mr. VOLKMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, today is another one of those sad days in the history of the 104th Congress. Today, once again, you are seeing the Democratic minority gagged basically by the Republican majority. They are going to, by passing this rule, be able to take up legislation in the foreseeable future all the way to the 1st of April, approximately, without going through the normal process of the rules of the House.
This is not new to the 104th Congress. This is a way that the 104th Congress, under Speaker Gingrich, has operated for over a year. Yet, a little over a year ago in this well, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], the chairman of the Committee on Rules, said that we were going to have openness in this Congress, we were going to have over 75 percent of the open rules. Where is the open rule?
So far this year, major legislation, the farm bill, antiterrorism, today we will finish immigration, all of those, major legislation, every one of them, closed rule, semi-closed rule. No open rule. Not letting Members who are elected by their constituents to this house, to this democratic body, any democracy at all, not letting them talk about their amendments and offer their amendments.
Mr. Speaker, no, there is no democracy in this great House of Representatives. This bulwark, this great light for every other nation, we do not have democracy. We have a dictatorship, a strong dictatorship, one that rules with an iron hand and tells Members they do not have to participate. In fact, we cannot even participate in the operation of this House and what legislation goes and what amendments are offered and even what debate is had.
They are limiting time. Even if we get to offer an amendment, opponents to it cannot get up and speak unlimited on it and discuss it. No, no, 10 minutes, 15 minutes for a major amendment. Why? Because they want to run this House with an iron hand, not with openness, not with democracy. There is no democracy in this House of Representatives.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
It is awful hard not to like the gentleman from Missouri. His comments are amusing, but his comments certainly are not relevant here. He talks about the fact that I, as a representative of the majority party here today, am trying to gag the minority party. I think he probably had 20 speakers, I have spoken this entire time, he has had 20 speakers. There is no gagging going on here.
Let me just say that these comments are all fine, and it may play good for the liveliness of this debate because sometimes these rule debates get pretty boring; but the fact is this. Your President, our President, the President of the United States agrees with this continuing resolution. He does not want to shut down the Government tomorrow. So I urge my colleague to call his President, call our President, call the Democratic National Committee and say, should we really vote no on this rule and shut this Government down? Is this the right strategy to pursue, to shut down the Government tomorrow? It is a darned risky strategy. I do not think they are going to succeed.
Mr. Speaker, I am trying to offer some advice to the Democrats over there that are urging a ``no'' vote. Do not do it, it will backfire on you. Do not shut down the Government. Work with us on this rule. Cooperate with us. The President is going to sign it. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure this thing out. We have got to keep the Government operating tomorrow.
The gentleman talks about fairness and a gag, the minority leader has the right to offer the final amendment tomorrow to the gentleman from Missouri. We did not gag him. We did not gag any of them in the last hour. There is plenty of time for debate. But do not let that debate run the next 24 hours and shut this Government down. Because if they do, they are making a mistake. We do not need to shut the Government down.
Vote ``yes'' on this rule or take the option of shutting it down. Do not do the latter because it will hurt every man, woman, and child in this country.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. FROST asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks and to include extraneous material.)
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``no'' vote on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I shall offer an amendment to the rule which will provide an open rule for consideration of a clean continuing resolution without the martial law provisions. These extraordinary procedures would allow the House to bring up a series of budget bills without the normal 1-day layover period required by the rules. It's time to return to the regular order and live by the rule which protects the rights of Members on both sides of the aisle.
I include for the Record the text of the amendment I would offer if the previous question were defeated.
Amendment to H. Res. 386
On page 2, strike all after line 9 through the end of the resolution.
On page 1, strike lines 1 and 2 and insert:
``Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the joint reso-''
On page 2, line 4, after the period add the following:
``After general debate the joint resolution shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. At the conclusion of consideration of the joint resolution for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the joint resolution to the House with such amendments as many have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the joint resolution.''
Explanation: The amendment to the resolution strips out the martial law provisions of the rule and provides on open rule for consideration of the short-term continuing resolution.
Mr. Speaker, every single rule the House has adopted this session has been a restrictive rule; yes, you heard that correctly, the Republican House has so far adopted 100 percent restrictive rules in this session. And if it is adopted, the rule before us will leave that 100 percent purely restrictive rules record intact.
This is the 62d restrictive rule reported out of the Rules Committee this Congress.
In addition more than 72 percent of the legislation considered this session has not been reported from committee--8 out of 11 measures brought up this session have been unreported.
At this point I include the following information for the Record.
FLOOR PROCEDURE IN THE 104TH CONGRESS; COMPILED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE DEMOCRATS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process used for floor Amendments in
Bill No. Title Resolution No. consideration order
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1*........................ Compliance........ H. Res. 6 Closed................ None.
H. Res. 6...................... Opening Day Rules H. Res. 5 Closed; contained a None.
Package. closed rule on H.R. 1 within the closed rule. H.R. 5*........................ Unfunded Mandates. H. Res. 38 Restrictive; Motion N/A.
adopted over
Democratic objection in the Committee of the Whole to limit debate on section 4;
Pre-printing gets preference. H.J. Res. 2*................... Balanced Budget... H. Res. 44 Restrictive; only 2R; 4D.
certain substitutes. H. Res. 43..................... Committee Hearings H. Res. 43 (OJ) Restrictive; N/A.
Scheduling. considered in House no amendments. H.R. 101....................... To transfer a H. Res. 51 Open.................. N/A.
parcel of land to the Taos Pueblo
Indians of New
Mexico. H.R. 400....................... To provide for the H. Res. 52 Open.................. N/A.
exchange of lands within Gates of the Arctic
National Park
Preserve. H.R. 440....................... To provide for the H. Res. 53 Open.................. N/A.
conveyance of lands to certain individuals in
Butte County,
California. H.R. 2*........................ Line Item Veto.... H. Res. 55 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
gets preference. H.R. 665*...................... Victim Restitution H. Res. 61 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
Act of 1995. gets preference. H.R. 666*...................... Exclusionary Rule H. Res. 60 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
Reform Act of gets preference.
1995. H.R. 667*...................... Violent Criminal H. Res. 63 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Incarceration Act Time Cap on of 1995. amendments. H.R. 668*...................... The Criminal Alien H. Res. 69 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
Deportation gets preference;
Improvement Act. Contains self- executing provision. H.R. 728*...................... Local Government H. Res. 79 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Law Enforcement Time Cap on
Block Grants. amendments; Pre- printing gets preference. H.R. 7*........................ National Security H. Res. 83 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Revitalization Time Cap on
Act. amendments; Pre- printing gets preference. H.R. 729*...................... Death Penalty/ N/A Restrictive; brought N/A.
Habeas. up under UC with a 6 hr. time cap on amendments. S. 2........................... Senate Compliance. N/A Closed; Put on None.
Suspension Calendar over Democratic objection. H.R. 831....................... To Permanently H. Res. 88 Restrictive; makes in 1D.
Extend the Health order only the
Insurance Gibbons amendment;
Deduction for the Waives all points of
Self-Employed. order; Contains self- executing provision. H.R. 830*...................... The Paperwork H. Res. 91 Open.................. N/A.
Reduction Act. H.R. 889....................... Emergency H. Res. 92 Restrictive; makes in 1D.
Supplemental/ order only the Obey
Rescinding substitute.
Certain Budget
Authority. H.R. 450*...................... Regulatory H. Res. 93 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Moratorium. Time Cap on amendments; Pre- printing gets preference. H.R. 1022*..................... Risk Assessment... H. Res. 96 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Time Cap on amendments. H.R. 926*...................... Regulatory H. Res. 100 Open.................. N/A.
Flexibility. H.R. 925*...................... Private Property H. Res. 101 Restrictive; 12 hr. 1D.
Protection Act. time cap on amendments; Requires
Members to pre-print their amendments in the Record prior to the bill's consideration for amendment, waives germaneness and budget act points of order as well as points of order concerning appropriating on a legislative bill against the committee substitute used as base text. H.R. 1058*..................... Securities H. Res. 105 Restrictive; 8 hr. 1D.
Litigation Reform time cap on
Act. amendments; Pre- printing gets preference; Makes in order the Wyden amendment and waives germaneness against it. H.R. 988*...................... The Attorney H. Res. 104 Restrictive; 7 hr. N/A.
Accountability time cap on
Act of 1995. amendments; Pre- printing gets preference. H.R. 956*...................... Product Liability H. Res. 109 Restrictive; makes in 8D; 7R.
and Legal Reform order only 15 germane
Act. amendments and denies
64 germane amendments from being considered. H.R. 1158...................... Making Emergency H. Res. 115 Restrictive; Combines N/A.
Supplemental emergency H.R. 1158 &
Appropriations nonemergency 1159 and and Rescissions. strikes the abortion provision; makes in order only pre- printed amendments that include offsets within the same chapter (deeper cuts in programs already cut); waives points of order against three amendments; waives cl 2 of rule
XXI against the bill, cl 2, XXI and cl 7 of rule XVI against the substitute; waives cl
2(e) od rule XXI against the amendments in the
Record; 10 hr time cap on amendments. 30 minutes debate on each amendment. H.J. Res. 73*.................. Term Limits....... H. Res. 116 Restrictive; Makes in 1D; 3R
order only 4 amendments considered under a ``Queen of the Hill'' procedure and denies 21 germane amendments from being considered. H.R. 4*........................ Welfare Reform.... H. Res. 119 Restrictive; Makes in 5D; 26R.
order only 31 perfecting amendments and two substitutes;
Denies 130 germane amendments from being considered; The substitutes are to be considered under a
``Queen of the Hill'' procedure; All points of order are waived against the amendments. H.R. 1271*..................... Family Privacy Act H. Res. 125 Open.................. N/A.
H.R. 660*...................... Housing for Older H. Res. 126 Open.................. N/A.
Persons Act. H.R. 1215*..................... The Contract With H. Res. 129 Restrictive; Self 1D.
America Tax Executes language
Relief Act of that makes tax cuts
1995. contingent on the adoption of a balanced budget plan and strikes section
3006. Makes in order only one substitute.
Waives all points of order against the bill, substitute made in order as original text and Gephardt substitute. H.R. 483....................... Medicare Select H. Res. 130 Restrictive; waives cl 1D.
Extension. 2(1)(6) of rule XI against the bill; makes H.R. 1391 in order as original text; makes in order only the Dingell substitute; allows
Commerce Committee to file a report on the bill at any time. H.R. 655....................... Hydrogen Future H. Res. 136 Open.................. N/A.
Act. H.R. 1361...................... Coast Guard H. Res. 139 Open; waives sections N/A.
Authorization. 302(f) and 308(a) of the Congressional
Budget Act against the bill's consideration and the committee substitute; waives cl 5(a) of rule XXI against the committee substitute. H.R. 961....................... Clean Water Act... H. Res. 140 Open; pre-printing N/A.
gets preference; waives sections
302(f) and 602(b) of the Budget Act against the bill's consideration; waives cl 7 of rule XVI, cl
5(a) of rule XXI and section 302(f) of the
Budget Act against the committee substitute. Makes in order Shuster substitute as first order of business. H.R. 535....................... Corning National H. Res. 144 Open.................. N/A.
Fish Hatchery
Conveyance Act. H.R. 584....................... Conveyance of the H. Res. 145 Open.................. N/A.
Fairport National
Fish Hatchery to the State of Iowa. H.R. 614....................... Conveyance of the H. Res. 146 Open.................. N/A.
New London
National Fish
Hatchery
Production
Facility. H. Con. Res. 67................ Budget Resolution. H. Res. 149 Restrictive; Makes in 3D; 1R.
order 4 substitutes under regular order;
Gephardt, Neumann/
Solomon, Payne/Owens,
President's Budget if printed in Record on
5/17/95; waives all points of order against substitutes and concurrent resolution; suspends application of Rule
XLIX with respect to the resolution; self- executes Agriculture language. H.R. 1561...................... American Overseas H. Res. 155 Restrictive; Requires N/A.
Interests Act of amendments to be
1995. printed in the Record prior to their consideration; 10 hr. time cap; waives cl
2(1)(6) of rule XI against the bill's consideration; Also waives sections
302(f), 303(a),
308(a) and 402(a) against the bill's consideration and the committee amendment in order as original text; waives cl 5(a) of rule XXI against the amendment; amendment consideration is closed at 2:30 p.m. on May 25, 1995. Self- executes provision which removes section
2210 from the bill.
This was done at the request of the Budget
Committee. H.R. 1530...................... National Defense H. Res. 164 Restrictive; Makes in 36R; 18D; 2
Authorization Act order only the Bipartisan.
FY 1996. amendments printed in the report; waives all points of order against the bill, substitute and amendments printed in the report. Gives the
Chairman en bloc authority. Self- executes a provision which strikes section
807 of the bill; provides for an additional 30 min. of debate on Nunn-Lugar section; Allows Mr.
Clinger to offer a modification of his amendment with the concurrence of Ms.
Collins. H.R. 1817...................... Military H. Res. 167 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Construction cl. 6 of rule XXI
Appropriations; against the bill; 1
FY 1996. hr. general debate;
Uses House passed budget numbers as threshold for spending amounts pending passage of
Budget. H.R. 1854...................... Legislative Branch H. Res. 169 Restrictive; Makes in 5R; 4D; 2
Appropriations. order only 11 Bipartisan.
amendments; waives sections 302(f) and
308(a) of the Budget
Act against the bill and cl. 2 and cl. 6 of rule XXI against the bill. All points of order are waived against the amendments. H.R. 1868...................... Foreign Operations H. Res. 170 Open; waives cl. 2, N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 5(b), and cl. 6 of rule XXI against the bill; makes in order the Gilman amendments as first order of business; waives all points of order against the amendments; if adopted they will be considered as original text; waives cl. 2 of rule XXI against the amendments printed in the report. Pre- printing gets priority (Hall)
(Menendez) (Goss)
(Smith, NJ). H.R. 1905...................... Energy & Water H. Res. 171 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI against the bill; makes in order the
Shuster amendment as the first order of business; waives all points of order against the amendment; if adopted it will be considered as original text. Pre- printing gets priority. H.J. Res. 79................... Constitutional H. Res. 173 Closed; provides one N/A.
Amendment to hour of general
Permit Congress debate and one motion and States to to recommit with or
Prohibit the without instructions;
Physical if there are
Desecration of instructions, the MO the American Flag. is debatable for 1 hr. H.R. 1944...................... Recissions Bill... H. Res. 175 Restrictive; Provides N/A.
for consideration of the bill in the
House; Permits the
Chairman of the
Appropriations
Committee to offer one amendment which is unamendable; waives all points of order against the amendment.
H.R. 1868 (2nd rule)........... Foreign Operations H. Res. 177 Restrictive; Provides N/A.
Appropriations. for further consideration of the bill; makes in order only the four amendments printed in the rules report (20 min. each). Waives all points of order against the amendments; Prohibits intervening motions in the Committee of the Whole; Provides for an automatic rise and report following the disposition of the amendments. H.R. 1977 *Rule Defeated*...... Interior H. Res. 185 Open; waives sections N/A.
Appropriations. 302(f) and 308(a) of the Budget Act and cl
2 and cl 6 of rule
XXI; provides that the bill be read by title; waives all points of order against the Tauzin amendment; self- executes Budget
Committee amendment; waives cl 2(e) of rule XXI against amendments to the bill; Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 1977...................... Interior H.Res. 187 Open; waives sections N/A.
Appropriations. 302(f), 306 and
308(a) of the Budget
Act; waives clauses 2 and 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; waives all points of order against the Tauzin amendment; provides that the bill be read by title; self- executes Budget
Committee amendment and makes NEA funding subject to House passed authorization; waives cl 2(e) of rule XXI against the amendments to the bill; Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 1976...................... Agriculture H. Res. 188 Open; waives clauses 2 N/A.
Appropriations. and 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; provides that the bill be read by title; Makes Skeen amendment first order of business, if adopted the amendment will be considered as base text (10 min.);
Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 1977 (3rd rule)........... Interior H. Res. 189 Restrictive; provides N/A.
Appropriations. for the further consideration of the bill; allows only amendments pre- printed before July
14th to be considered; limits motions to rise. H.R. 2020...................... Treasury Postal H. Res. 190 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; provides the bill be read by title; Pre-printing gets priority. H.J. Res. 96................... Disapproving MFN H. Res. 193 Restrictive; provides N/A.
for China. for consideration in the House of H.R.
2058 (90 min.) And
H.J. Res. 96 (1 hr).
Waives certain provisions of the
Trade Act. H.R. 2002...................... Transportation H. Res. 194 Open; waives cl. 3 0f N/A.
Appropriations. rule XIII and section
401 (a) of the CBA against consideration of the bill; waives cl. 6 and cl. 2 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; Makes in order the Clinger/Solomon amendment waives all points of order against the amendment
(Line Item Veto); provides the bill be read by title; Pre- printing gets priority. *RULE
AMENDED*. H.R. 70........................ Exports of Alaskan H. Res. 197 Open; Makes in order N/A.
North Slope Oil. the Resources
Committee amendment in the nature of a substitute as original text; Pre- printing gets priority; Provides a
Senate hook-up with
S. 395. H.R. 2076...................... Commerce, Justice H. Res. 198 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; Pre- printing gets priority; provides the bill be read by title.. H.R. 2099...................... VA/HUD H. Res. 201 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; Provides that the amendment in part 1 of the report is the first business, if adopted it will be considered as base text (30 min.); waives all points of order against the Klug and
Davis amendments; Pre- printing gets priority; Provides that the bill be read by title. S. 21.......................... Termination of H. Res. 204 Restrictive; 3 hours ID.
U.S. Arms Embargo of general debate; on Bosnia. Makes in order an amendment to be offered by the
Minority Leader or a designee (1 hr); If motion to recommit has instructions it can only be offered by the Minority
Leader or a designee. H.R. 2126...................... Defense H. Res. 205 Open; waives cl. N/A.
Appropriations. 2(l)(6) of rule XI and section 306 of the Congressional
Budget Act against consideration of the bill; waives cl. 2 and cl. 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; self- executes a strike of sections 8021 and
8024 of the bill as requested by the
Budget Committee; Pre- printing gets priority; Provides the bill be read by title. H.R. 1555...................... Communications Act H. Res. 207 Restrictive; waives 2R/3D/3 Bi-
of 1995. sec. 302(f) of the partisan.
Budget Act against consideration of the bill; Makes in order the Commerce
Committee amendment as original text and waives sec. 302(f) of the Budget Act and cl. 5(a) of rule XXI against the amendment; Makes in order the Bliely amendment (30 min.) as the first order of business, if adopted it will be original text; makes in order only the amendments printed in the report and waives all points of order against the amendments; provides a Senate hook-up with
S. 652. H.R. 2127...................... Labor/HHS H. Res. 208 Open; Provides that N/A.
Appropriations the first order of
Act. business will be the managers amendments
(10 min.), if adopted they will be considered as base text; waives cl. 2 and cl. 6 of rule XXI against provisions in the bill; waives all points of order against certain amendments printed in the report; Pre- printing gets priority; Provides the bill be read by title. H.R. 1594...................... Economically H. Res. 215 Open; 2 hr of gen. N/A.
Targeted debate. makes in
Investments. order the committee substitute as original text. H.R. 1655...................... Intelligence H. Res. 216 Restrictive; waives N/A.
Authorization. sections 302(f),
308(a) and 401(b) of the Budget Act. Makes in order the committee substitute as modified by Govt.
Reform amend
(striking sec. 505) and an amendment striking title VII.
Cl 7 of rule XVI and cl 5(a) of rule XXI are waived against the substitute.
Sections 302(f) and
401(b) of the CBA are also waived against the substitute.
Amendments must also be pre-printed in the
Congressional record. H.R. 1162...................... Deficit Reduction H. Res. 218 Open; waives cl 7 of N/A.
Lock Box. rule XVI against the committee substitute made in order as original text; Pre- printing gets priority. H.R. 1670...................... Federal H. Res. 219 Open; waives sections N/A.
Acquisition 302(f) and 308(a) of
Reform Act of the Budget Act
1995. against consideration of the bill; bill will be read by title; waives cl 5(a) of rule XXI and section 302(f) of the
Budget Act against the committee substitute. Pre- printing gets priority. H.R. 1617...................... To Consolidate and H. Res. 222 Open; waives section N/A.
Reform Workforce 302(f) and 401(b) of
Development and the Budget Act
Literacy Programs against the
Act (CAREERS). substitute made in order as original text (H.R. 2332), cl.
5(a) of rule XXI is also waived against the substitute. provides for consideration of the managers amendment
(10 min.) If adopted, it is considered as base text. H.R. 2274...................... National Highway H. Res. 224 Open; waives section N/A.
System 302(f) of the Budget
Designation Act Act against of 1995. consideration of the bill; Makes H.R. 2349 in order as original text; waives section
302(f) of the Budget
Act against the substitute; provides for the consideration of a managers amendment (10 min.)
If adopted, it is considered as base text; Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 927....................... Cuban Liberty and H. Res. 225 Restrictive; waives cl 2R/2D
Democratic 2(L)(2)(B) of rule XI
Solidarity Act of against consideration
1995. of the bill; makes in order H.R. 2347 as base text; waives cl
7 of rule XVI against the substitute; Makes
Hamilton amendment the first amendment to be considered (1 hr). Makes in order only amendments printed in the report. H.R. 743....................... The Teamwork for H. Res. 226 Open; waives cl N/A.
Employees and 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI managers Act of against consideration
1995. of the bill; makes in order the committee amendment as original text; Pre-printing get priority. H.R. 1170...................... 3-Judge Court for H. Res. 227 Open; makes in order a N/A.
Certain committee amendment
Injunctions. as original text; Pre- printing gets priority. H.R. 1601...................... International H. Res. 228 Open; makes in order a N/A.
Space Station committee amendment
Authorization Act as original text; pre- of 1995. printing gets priority. H.J. Res. 108.................. Making Continuing H. Res. 230 Closed; Provides for ..............
Appropriations the immediate for FY 1996. consideration of the
CR; one motion to recommit which may have instructions only if offered by the Minority Leader or a designee. H.R. 2405...................... Omnibus Civilian H. Res. 234 Open; self-executes a N/A.
Science provision striking
Authorization Act section 304(b)(3) of of 1995. the bill (Commerce
Committee request);
Pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 2259...................... To Disapprove H. Res. 237 Restrictive; waives cl 1D
Certain 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI
Sentencing against the bill's
Guideline consideration; makes
Amendments. in order the text of the Senate bill S.
1254 as original text; Makes in order only a Conyers substitute; provides a senate hook-up after adoption. H.R. 2425...................... Medicare H. Res. 238 Restrictive; waives 1D
Preservation Act. all points of order against the bill's consideration; makes in order the text of
H.R. 2485 as original text; waives all points of order against H.R. 2485; makes in order only an amendment offered by the Minority
Leader or a designee; waives all points of order against the amendment; waives cl
5 of rule
XXI (\3/5\ requirement on votes raising taxes). H.R. 2492...................... Legislative Branch H. Res. 239 Restrictive; provides N/A.
Appropriations for consideration of
Bill. the bill in the House. H.R. 2491...................... 7 Year Balanced H. Res. 245 Restrictive; makes in 1D
H. Con. Res. 109............... Budget order H.R. 2517 as
Reconciliation original text; waives
Social Security all pints of order
Earnings Test against the bill;
Reform. Makes in order only
H.R. 2530 as an amendment only if offered by the
Minority Leader or a designee; waives all points of order against the amendment; waives cl
5 of rule
XXI (\3/5\ requirement on votes raising taxes). H.R. 1833...................... Partial Birth H. Res. 251 Closed................ N/A.
Abortion Ban Act of 1995. H.R. 2546...................... D.C. H. Res. 252 Restrictive; waives N/A
Appropriations FY all points of order
1996. against the bill's consideration; Makes in order the Walsh amendment as the first order of business (10 min.); if adopted it is considered as base text; waives cl 2 and
6 of rule XXI against the bill; makes in order the Bonilla,
Gunderson and
Hostettler amendments
(30 min.); waives all points of order against the amendments; debate on any further amendments is limited to 30 min. each. H.J. Res. 115.................. Further Continuing H. Res. 257 Closed; Provides for N/A
Appropriations the immediate for FY 1996. consideration of the
CR; one motion to recommit which may have instructions only if offered by the Minority Leader or a designee. H.R. 2586...................... Temporary Increase H. Res. 258 Restrictive; Provides 5R
in the Statutory for the immediate
Debt Limit. consideration of the
CR; one motion to recommit which may have instructions only if offered by the Minority Leader or a designee; self- executes 4 amendments in the rule; Solomon,
Medicare Coverage of
Certain Anti-Cancer
Drug Treatments,
Habeas Corpus Reform,
Chrysler (MI); makes in order the Walker amend (40 min.) on regulatory reform. H.R. 2539...................... ICC Termination... H. Res. 259 Open; waives section ..............
302(f) and section
308(a). H.J. Res. 115.................. Further Continuing H. Res. 261 Closed; provides for N/A.
Appropriations the immediate for FY 1996. consideration of a motion by the
Majority Leader or his designees to dispose of the Senate amendments (1hr).
H.R. 2586...................... Temporary Increase H. Res. 262 Closed; provides for N/A.
in the Statutory the immediate
Limit on the consideration of a
Public Debt. motion by the
Majority Leader or his designees to dispose of the Senate amendments (1hr). H. Res. 250.................... House Gift Rule H. Res. 268 Closed; provides for 2R
Reform. consideration of the bill in the House; 30 min. of debate; makes in order the Burton amendment and the
Gingrich en bloc amendment (30 min. each); waives all points of order against the amendments; Gingrich is only in order if
Burton fails or is not offered. H.R. 2564...................... Lobbying H. Res. 269 Open; waives cl. N/A.
Disclosure Act of 2(l)(6) of rule XI
1995. against the bill's consideration; waives all points of order against the Istook and McIntosh amendments. H.R. 2606...................... Prohibition on H. Res. 273 Restrictive; waives N/A.
Funds for Bosnia all points of order
Deployment. against the bill's consideration; provides one motion to amend if offered by the Minority
Leader or designee (1 hr non-amendable); motion to recommit which may have instructions only if offered by Minority
Leader or his designee; if Minority
Leader motion is not offered debate time will be extended by 1 hr. H.R. 1788...................... Amtrak Reform and H. Res. 289 Open; waives all N/A.
Privatization Act points of order of 1995. against the bill's consideration; makes in order the
Transportation substitute modified by the amend in the report; Bill read by title; waives all points of order against the substitute; makes in order a managers amend as the first order of business, if adopted it is considered base text
(10 min.); waives all points of order against the amendment; Pre- printing gets priority. H.R. 1350...................... Maritime Security H. Res. 287 Open; makes in order N/A.
Act of 1995. the committee substitute as original text; makes in order a managers amendment which if adopted is considered as original text (20 min.) unamendable; pre-printing gets priority. H.R. 2621...................... To Protect Federal H. Res. Closed; provides for N/A.
Trust Funds. the adoption of the
Ways & Means amendment printed in the report. 1 hr. of general debate. H.R. 1745...................... Utah Public Lands H.Res. 303 Open; waives cl N/A.
Management Act of 2(l)(6) of rule XI
1995. and sections 302(f) and 311(a) of the
Budget Act against the bill's consideration. Makes in order the
Resources substitute as base text and waives cl 7 of rule
XVI and sections
302(f) and 308(a) of the Budget Act; makes in order a managers' amend as the first order of business, if adopted it is considered base text
(10 min).. H.Res. 304..................... Providing for N/A Closed; makes in order 1D; 2R
Debate and three resolutions;
Consideration of H.R. 2770 (Dorman),
Three Measures H.Res. 302 (Buyer),
Relating to U.S. and H.Res. 306
Troop Deployments (Gephardt); 1 hour of in Bosnia. debate on each.. H.Res. 309..................... Revised Budget H.Res. 309 Closed; provides 2 N/A.
Resolution. hours of general debate in the House.. H.R. 558....................... Texas Low-Level H.Res. 313 Open; pre-printing N/A.
Radioactive Waste gets priority.
Disposal Compact
Consent Act. H.R. 2677...................... The National Parks H. Res. 323 Closed; consideration N/A.
and National in the House; self-
Wildlife Refuge executes Young
Systems Freedom amendment.
Act of 1995.
PROCEDURE IN THE 104TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION H.R. 1643...................... To authorize the H. Res. 334 Closed; provides to N/A.
extension of take the bill from nondiscriminatory the Speaker's table treatment (MFN) with the Senate to the products amendment, and of Bulgaria. consider in the House the motion printed in the Rules Committee report; 1 hr. of general debate; previous question is considered as ordered. ** NR. H.J. Res. 134.................. Making continuing H. Res. 336 Closed; provides to N/A.
H. Con. Res. 131............... appropriations/ take from the establishing Speaker's table H.J. procedures making Res. 134 with the the transmission Senate amendment and of the continuing concur with the resolution H.J. Senate amendment with
Res. 134. an amendment (H. Con.
Res. 131) which is self-executed in the rule. The rule provides further that the bill shall not be sent back to the
Senate until the
Senate agrees to the provisions of H. Con.
Res. 131. ** NR. H. R. 1358..................... Conveyance of H. Res. 338 Closed; provides to N/A.
National Marine take the bill from
Fisheries Service the Speakers table
Laboratory at with the Senate
Gloucester, amendment, and
Massachusetts. consider in the house the motion printed in the Rules Committee report; 1 hr. of general debate; previous quesetion is considered as ordered. ** NR. H.R. 2924...................... Social Security H. Res. 355 Closed; ** NR......... N/A.
Guarantee Act. H.R. 2854...................... The Agricultural H. Res. 366 Restrictive; waives 5D; 9R; 2
Market Transition all points of order Bipartisan.
Program. against the bill; 2 hrs of general debate; makes in order a committee substitute as original text and waives all points of order against the substitute; makes in order only the 16 amends printed in the report and waives all points of order against the amendments; circumvents unfunded mandates law;
Chairman has en bloc authority for amends in report (20 min.) on each en bloc.. H.R. 994....................... Regulatory Sunset H.Res 368 Open rule; makes in N/A.
& Review Act of order the Hyde
1995. substitute printed in the Record as original text; waives cl 7 of rule XVI against the substitute; Pre- printing gets priority; vacates the
House action on S.
219 and provides to take the bill from the Speakers table and consider the
Senate bill; allows
Chrmn. Clinger a motion to strike all after the enacting clause of the Senate bill and insert the text of H.R. 994 as passed by the House
(1 hr) debate; waives germaneness against the motion; provides if the motion is adopted that it is in order for the House to insist on its amendments and request a conference. H.R. 3021...................... To Guarantee the H.Res 371 Closed rule; gives one N/A.
Continuing Full motion to recommit,
Investment of which if it contains
Social security instructions, may and Other Federal only if offered by
Funds in the Minority Leader
Obligations of or his designee. ** the United States. NR. H.R. 3019...................... A Further H.Res. 372 Restrictive; self- 2D/2R.
Downpayment executes CBO language
Toward a Balanced regarding contingency
Budget. funds in section 2 of the rule; makes in order only the amendments printed in the report; Lowey (20 min), Istook (20 min), Crapo (20 min),
Obey (1 hr); waives all points of order against the amendments; give one motion to recommit, which if contains instructions, may only if offered by the Minority Leader or his designee. **
NR. H.R. 2703...................... The Effective H. Res. 380 Restrictive; makes in 6D; 7R; 4
Death Penalty and order only the Bipartisan.
Public Safety Act amendments printed in of 1996. the report; waives all points of orer against the amendments; gives
Judiciary Chairman en bloc authority (20 min.) on enblocs; provides a Senate hook-up with S. 735.
** NR. H.R. 2202...................... The Immigration H. Res. 384 Restrictive; waives 12D; 19R; 1
and National all points of order Bipartisan.
Interest Act of against the bill and
1995. amendments in the report except for those arising under sec. 425(a) of the
Budget Act (unfunded mandates); 2 hrs. of general debate on the bill; makes in order the committee substitute as base text; makes in order only the amends in the report; gives the
Judiciary Chairman en bloc authority (20 min.) of debate on the en blocs; self- executes the Smith
(TX) amendment re: employee verification program.. H.J. Res. 165.................. Making further H. Res. 386 Closed; provides for N/A.
continuing the consideration of appropriations the CR in the House for FY 1996. and gives one motion to recommit which may contain instructions only if offered by the Minority Leader; the rule also waives cl 4(b) of rule XI against the following: an omnibus appropriations bill, another CR, a bill extending the debt limit. ** NR.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Contract Bills, 67% restrictive; 33% open. ** All legislation 1st Session, 53% restrictive; 47% open. ***
Legislation 2d Session. 91% restrictive; 9% open. **** All legislation 104th Congress 62% restrictive; 38% open. ***** NR indicates that the legislation being considered by the House for amendment has circumvented standard procedure and was never reported from any House committee. ****** Restrictive rules are those which limit the number of amendments which can be offered, and include so-called modified open and modified closed rules as well as completely closed rules and rules providing for consideration in the House as opposed to the
Committee of the Whole. This definition of restrictive rule is taken from the Republican chart of resolutions reported from the Rules Committee in the 103d Congress. N/A means not available.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, as I stated earlier, I am asking for a ``no'' vote on the previous question. This matter, we fully explored this matter today. I would only point out to the gentleman on the other side the concept of martial law really was a concept that was talked about by a Member on his side of the aisle during preceding Congresses, the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Walker, who is still with us, and he may want to discuss that with Mr. Walker some time. But it is Mr. Walker, who when we were in the majority, stood up at that microphone when they were in the minority and railed against this procedure time and time again. I have not seen Mr. Walker on the floor today.
Mr. Speaker, I would be interested to share his observations at this point because he was the leading proponent on your side of the aisle for not suspending the rules, for not doing what you are doing today and have done for 4 months now. I urge my colleagues to vote down the previous question and to proceed with the consideration of this measure in an orderly manner.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, let us first start out by advising the gentleman from Texas that the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Gephardt] is the one who first utilized this rule in this fashion. Second of all, I do consider the gentleman from Texas a professional friend. We have had a good working business relationship. But let me offer a little advice. Do not shut down the Government in a battle over this rule. It is not right. It is not going to work, and it is going to backfire on you.
Now, from a political viewpoint, maybe it would benefit the Republicans for you to take the hit on this deal, but you do not need to take the hit. I am putting myself above that partisanship and worrying about 250 million people, 230 million people in this country. We do not need to shut the Government down. That is exactly what you are doing by urging what is, in essence, a ``no'' vote on the rule. Let us pass the rule. Let us get some more negotiating time for the good-faith negotiations that are going on between the President, the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House.
Mr. Speaker, on this issue of the rule, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost] had the opportunity last night to entertain the type of motions that he is now having introduced into the Record. In fact, he did not bring it up on his own initiative, as certainly he had in the past, but he did not bring it up last night. I am not being critical of that point. The point I am making is the chairman of the committee, the Republican chairman, offered to the gentleman from Texas the opportunity to do exactly what he is attempting to do today on the floor.
Mr. Speaker, now they have revised their strategy, and I think their strategy is headed straight for a Government shutdown as that hand moves 24 hours on that clock. We do not want to close this Government down. We should not want to close this Government down. Let us keep the Government open. Let us vote ``yes'' on the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). The question is on ordering the previous question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the noes appeared to have it.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
Pursuant to clause 5 of rule XV, the Chair announces that he will reduce to a minimum of 5 minutes the period of time within which a vote by electronic device, if ordered, will be taken on the question of agreeing to the resolution.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 234, nays 187, not voting 10, as follows:
YEAS--234
AllardArcherArmeyBachusBaeslerBaker (CA)Baker (LA)BallengerBarrBarrett (NE)BartlettBartonBassBatemanBereuterBilbrayBilirakisBlileyBluteBoehlertBoehnerBonillaBonoBrownbackBryant (TN)BunnBunningBurrBurtonBuyerCallahanCalvertCampCampbellCanadyCastleChabotChamblissChenowethChristensenChryslerClingerCobleCoburnCollins (GA)CombestCooleyCoxCraneCrapoCremeansCubinCunninghamDavisDealDeLayDiaz-BalartDickeyDoolittleDornanDreierDuncanDunnEhlersEhrlichEmersonEnglishEnsignEverettEwingFawellFields (TX)FlanaganFoleyFowlerFoxFranks (CT)Franks (NJ)FrelinghuysenFrisaFunderburkGalleglyGanskeGekasGilchrestGillmorGilmanGoodlatteGoodlingGossGrahamGreenwoodGundersonGutknechtHall (TX)HancockHansenHastertHastings (WA)HayesHayworthHefleyHeinemanHergerHillearyHobsonHoekstraHokeHornHostettlerHoughtonHunterHutchinsonHydeInglisIstookJohnson (CT)Johnson, SamJonesKasichKellyKimKingKingstonKlugKnollenbergKolbeLaHoodLargentLathamLaTouretteLaughlinLazioLeachLewis (CA)Lewis (KY)LightfootLinderLivingstonLoBiondoLongleyLucasManzulloMartiniMcCollumMcCreryMcDadeMcHughMcInnisMcIntoshMcKeonMetcalfMeyersMicaMiller (FL)MolinariMoorheadMorellaMyersMyrickNethercuttNeumannNeyNorwoodNussleOxleyPackardParkerPaxonPetriPomboPorterPortmanPryceQuillenQuinnRamstadRegulaRiggsRobertsRogersRohrabacherRos-LehtinenRothRoukemaRoyceSalmonSanfordSaxtonSchaeferSchiffSeastrandSensenbrennerShadeggShawShaysShusterSkeenSmith (MI)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)Smith (WA)SolomonSouderSpenceStearnsStockmanStumpTalentTateTauzinTaylor (NC)ThomasThornberryTiahrtTorkildsenUptonVucanovichWaldholtzWalkerWalshWampWatts (OK)Weldon (FL)Weldon (PA)WellerWhiteWhitfieldWickerWolfYoung (AK)Young (FL)ZeliffZimmer
NAYS--187
AbercrombieAckermanAndrewsBaldacciBarciaBarrett (WI)BecerraBeilensonBentsenBermanBevillBishopBoniorBorskiBoucherBrewsterBrowderBrown (CA)Brown (FL)Brown (OH)Bryant (TX)CardinChapmanClayClaytonClementClyburnColemanCollins (MI)ConditConyersCostelloCoyneCramerDannerde la GarzaDeFazioDeLauroDellumsDeutschDicksDingellDixonDoggettDooleyDoyleDurbinEdwardsEngelEshooEvansFarrFattahFazioFields (LA)FilnerFlakeFogliettaFordFrank (MA)FrostFurseGejdensonGephardtGerenGibbonsGonzalezGordonGreenGutierrezHall (OH)HamiltonHarmanHastings (FL)HefnerHilliardHincheyHoldenHoyerJackson (IL)Jackson-Lee (TX)JacobsJeffersonJohnson (SD)Johnson, E. B.KanjorskiKapturKennedy (MA)Kennedy (RI)KennellyKildeeKleczkaKlinkLaFalceLantosLevinLewis (GA)LincolnLipinskiLofgrenLoweyLutherMaloneyMantonMarkeyMartinezMascaraMatsuiMcCarthyMcDermottMcHaleMcKinneyMcNultyMeehanMeekMenendezMiller (CA)MingeMinkMollohanMontgomeryMoranMurthaNadlerNealOberstarObeyOlverOrtizOrtonOwensPallonePastorPayne (NJ)Payne (VA)PelosiPeterson (FL)Peterson (MN)PickettPomeroyPoshardRahallRangelReedRichardsonRiversRoemerRoseRoybal-AllardRushSaboSandersSawyerSchroederSchumerScottSerranoSisiskySkaggsSkeltonSlaughterSprattStenholmStuddsStupakTannerTaylor (MS)TejedaThompsonThorntonThurmanTorresTorricelliTownsTraficantVelazquezVentoViscloskyVolkmerWardWatt (NC)WaxmanWilsonWiseWoolseyWynnYates
NOT VOTING--10
Collins (IL)ForbesJohnstonMoakleyRadanovichScarboroughStarkStokesWatersWilliams
{time} 1159
Ms. RIVERS and Mr. COYNE changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Mr. GILMAN changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
personal explanation
Mr. SCARBOROUGH. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 80, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to vote. Had I been present, I would have voted
``yea.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
recorded vote
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 237, noes 183, not voting 11, as follows:
AYES--237
AllardArcherArmeyBachusBaeslerBaker (CA)Baker (LA)BallengerBarrBarrett (NE)BartlettBartonBassBatemanBereuterBilbrayBilirakisBlileyBluteBoehlertBoehnerBonillaBonoBrownbackBryant (TN)BunnBunningBurrBurtonBuyerCallahanCalvertCampCampbellCanadyCastleChabotChamblissChenowethChristensenChryslerClingerCobleCoburnCollins (GA)CombestCooleyCraneCrapoCremeansCubinCunninghamDavisDealDeLayDiaz-BalartDickeyDoolittleDornanDreierDuncanDunnEhlersEhrlichEmersonEnglishEnsignEverettEwingFawellFields (TX)FlanaganFoleyForbesFowlerFoxFranks (CT)Franks (NJ) FrelinghuysenFrisaFunderburkGalleglyGanskeGekasGilchrestGillmorGilmanGoodlatteGoodlingGossGrahamGreenwoodGundersonGutknechtHall (TX)HancockHansenHastertHastings (WA)HayesHayworthHefleyHeinemanHergerHillearyHobsonHoekstraHokeHornHostettlerHoughtonHunterHutchinsonHydeInglisIstookJohnson (CT)Johnson, SamJonesKasichKellyKimKingKingstonKlugKnollenbergKolbeLaHoodLargentLathamLaTouretteLaughlinLazioLeachLewis (CA)Lewis (KY)LightfootLinderLivingstonLoBiondoLongleyLucasManzulloMartiniMcCollumMcCreryMcDadeMcHughMcInnisMcIntoshMcKeonMetcalfMeyersMicaMiller (FL)MolinariMontgomeryMoorheadMorellaMyersMyrickNethercuttNeumannNeyNorwoodNussleOxleyPackardParkerPaxonPetriPomboPorterPortmanPryceQuillenQuinnRamstadRegulaRiggsRobertsRogersRohrabacherRos-LehtinenRothRoukemaRoyceSalmonSanfordSaxtonScarboroughSchaeferSchiffSeastrandSensenbrennerShadeggShawShaysShusterSkeenSmith (MI)Smith (NJ)Smith (TX)Smith (WA)SouderSpenceStearnsStockmanStumpTalentTateTauzinTaylor (NC)ThomasThornberryTiahrtTorkildsenTraficantUptonVucanovichWaldholtzWalkerWalshWampWatts (OK)Weldon (FL)Weldon (PA)WellerWhiteWhitfieldWickerWilsonWolfYoung (AK)Young (FL)ZeliffZimmer
NOES--183
AbercrombieAckermanAndrewsBaldacciBarciaBarrett (WI)BecerraBeilensonBentsenBermanBevillBishopBoniorBorskiBoucherBrewsterBrowderBrown (CA)Brown (FL)Brown (OH)Bryant (TX)CardinChapmanClayClaytonClementClyburnColemanCollins (MI)ConditConyersCostelloCoyneCramerDannerde la GarzaDeFazioDeLauroDellumsDeutschDicksDingellDixonDoggettDooleyDoyleDurbinEdwardsEngelEshooEvansFattahFazioFields (LA)FilnerFlakeFogliettaFordFrank (MA)FrostFurseGejdensonGephardtGerenGibbonsGonzalezGordonGreenGutierrezHall (OH)HamiltonHarmanHastings (FL)HefnerHilliardHincheyHoldenHoyerJackson (IL)Jackson-Lee (TX)JacobsJeffersonJohnson (SD)Johnson, E. B.KanjorskiKapturKennedy (MA)Kennedy (RI)KennellyKildeeKleczkaKlinkLaFalceLantosLevinLewis (GA)LincolnLipinskiLofgrenLoweyLutherMaloneyMantonMarkeyMartinezMascaraMatsuiMcCarthyMcDermottMcHaleMcKinneyMcNultyMeehanMeekMenendezMiller (CA)MingeMinkMollohanMoranMurthaNadlerNealOberstarObeyOlverOrtizOrtonOwensPallonePastorPayne (NJ)Payne (VA)PelosiPeterson (FL)Peterson (MN)PickettPomeroyPoshardRahallRangelReedRichardsonRiversRoemerRoseRoybal-AllardRushSaboSandersSawyerSchroederSchumerScottSerranoSisiskySkaggsSkeltonSlaughterSprattStenholmStuddsStupakTannerTaylor (MS)TejedaThompsonThorntonThurmanTorresTorricelliTownsVelazquezVentoViscloskyVolkmerWardWatt (NC)WaxmanWiseWoolseyWynnYates
NOT VOTING--11
Collins (IL)CoxFarrJohnstonMoakleyRadanovichSolomonStarkStokesWatersWilliams
{time} 1208
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________
