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.
“HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 115 PLACES PARTISAN POLITICS ABOVE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE NATION.” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Commerce was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H11912 on Nov. 8, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
{time} 2100
HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 115 PLACES PARTISAN POLITICS ABOVE THE BEST
INTERESTS OF THE NATION.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bilbray). Under a previous order of the House, the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee] is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my concerns about House Joint Resolution 115, the continuing appropriations bill that passed the House of Representatives today. First we short change the process by having the resolution end on December 1, 1995, rather than December 13, 1995, which would allow time for reasoned solutions to this crisis.
First of all, the House Rules Committee provided for a closed rule on this bill. Since this bill involves temporary funding for the Federal Government, it has a significant impact on all Americans. With this closed rule, Members were not allowed to offer any amendments to the important bill.
Secondly, the bill includes many provisions that are inappropriate for a continuing appropriations bill. For example, one provision would place severe restrictions on political advocacy by certain groups. This provision would extend beyond prohibiting a recipient of a federal grant from spending any federal funds on political advocacy but would also limit the amount of privately raised funds that federal grantees could use for political advocacy.
An organization receiving more than one-third of its funds from Federal grants could spend no more than $100,000 of privately raised funds on lobbying.
Furthermore, this bill even prohibits grantees from using federal funds to purchase goods or services from other organizations that spent at least $25,000 on political advocacy.
Federal grantees would also be required to report to the Federal Government on whether they engaged in political advocacy and describe the type of advocacy and list the amount of funds spent on such advocacy.
These restrictions on political advocacy are un-democratic and un-
American. It is shameful that this House is trying every maneuver by attempting to attach these restrictions to any bill before the House so that such provisions can become law.
The bill keeps the Medicare Part B premium in 1996 at 31.5 percent of costs instead of allowing the premium to automatically drop to 25 percent, as it would occur under current law. Millions of Americans depend upon Medicare Part B for physician and out-patient services.
This bill is also damaging because it contains a provision that would fund agencies scheduled to be eliminated in the 1996 appropriations bills at only 60 percent of their funding in fiscal year 1995.
These agencies include: The Low-income Home Energy Assistance Program; Goals 2000 Education Program; Americorps National Service Program; Community Development Financial Institutions Initiative; Commerce Department's Advanced Technology Program; and National Biological Survey.
These agencies are critically important to the quality of life for millions of Americans. This bill should have been more carefully considered by the House.
Again, Mr. Speaker, I must express my concerns about the extraneous material that has no place in this bill. In the future, I hope that on critical legislation, such as this continuing appropriations bill, we will put the best interests of the Nation above partisan politics.
____________________
