```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 81 (Tuesday, May 16, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H4974-H4977]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

   PERMISSION FOR ALL COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES TO SIT TODAY AND 
                BALANCE OF THE WEEK DURING 5-MINUTE RULE

  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged motion.
  [[Page H4975]] The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Armey moves, pursuant to clause 2 of rule XI, that all 
     the standing committees and subcommittees of the House be 
     permitted to sit today and the balance of the week while the 
     House is meeting in the Committee of the Whole House under 
     the 5-minute rule.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Armey] is 
recognized for 1 hour.

                         parliamentary inquiry

  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it.
  Mr. BONIOR. May I inquire as to whether the minority will get the 
customary 30 minutes under this motion that we have historically been 
entitled to and have received?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair indicates that this is the 
prerogative of the majority leader.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Armey].
  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, we have important work that we are trying to 
finish on the floor today. It has taken us longer than many of us 
thought would be necessary because we have tried to be as accommodating 
as we can to so many Members that have been interested in the Clean 
Water Act.
  Nevertheless, it is necessary for this motion to be voted on, and I 
really do not think it is all that controversial a matter.
  Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield 15 minutes to 
the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Bonior].
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this motion may not be all that controversial on the 
gentleman from Texas' [Mr. Armey] side of the Chamber, but it certainly 
is controversial on our side. Let me just make this point. No. 1, I 
would have hoped we would have gotten the customary 30 minutes for 
debate, half of the time that is allotted under the motion that the 
gentleman from Texas makes. But given that we are not, let me make some 
points with respect to what the majority is trying to do to the 
minority.
  Mr. Speaker, for the first few months of this Congress, we have had a 
process of consultation between the majority and the minority with 
respect to the issue of committee meetings during the 5-minute rule. 
And in almost every case, with few exceptions, we have been able to 
agree on this issue. But today the Republicans have gone too far. Today 
they are proposing a blanket waiver of the rule for an entire week, the 
very week that this House will be debating an historic budget 
resolution on this floor.
  Under this motion, Mr. Speaker, Members will be tied up in 
committees, they will be voting on unrelated bills while the budget is 
being considered on the floor of the House. Why are they doing this? 
Why are they taking Members away from the action of the year, this 
budget, and placing them in committees to listen to hearings, to mark 
up other bills when the most important piece of legislation we could be 
doing this year will be on the floor?
  Well, I guess, Mr. Speaker, if I were defending this budget 
resolution, which by the way in a poll in the Washington post today we 
saw 60 percent of the American people indicated they were opposed to 
this resolution, a resolution that devastates Medicare and Medicaid and 
education and the proper investments we need in this country, I would 
not want a lot of debate either. I would not want a lot of debate 
either.
  We just finished a resolution that deals with the question of 
Medicare, $300 billion cuts in Medicare in order to give a tax cut to 
the wealthiest few in our society. The point here is that every Member 
in this body should be available on the floor to participate in this 
historic debate.
  That is why they want Members to be tied up in committee, Mr. 
Speaker, because they are concerned that the membership will rebel 
against what is clearly in the eyes of the American people and those 
who have watched this process one-sided, one-sided on behalf of the 
wealthiest people in our society; tax breaks, if you make $230,000 a 
year, get a $20,000 tax break. If you are a senior who is struggling, 
like Iris Doyle who I represent in my district, who lives under Social 
Security, and a small pension she has, if you are living on a small 
pension, on Social Security, you are going to be paying an extra $1,000 
by the year 2002 under this proposal.
  We want to speak out on that, and we want to speak out with all our 
voices. We do not want one, two, or three, or four people on the floor 
while we debate this bill. We think every Member of this institution 
ought to be here. This is an historic bill.
  I was here in 1981 when we did the budget and we did the tax cuts. 
This is every bit, probably more significant in the impact it will have 
on Americans. There is a provision in here that is going to cost my 
students in Michigan an extra $4,000 a year to go to college because of 
what they are doing to student loans, not to speak of all the other 
educational cuts.
  Every Member on this floor ought to be here.
  Mr. Speaker, you cannot hide the facts from the American people, and 
this heavy-handed motion that is before us today to take Members away 
from this institution, this floor, will not help.
  Now, the first problem is occurring today in the Committee on 
Commerce, and I am going to yield in a second to the gentleman from 
Michigan [Mr. Dingell] to outline that problem, but it is not just the 
Committee on Commerce. This motion allows all House committees to hold 
markups for the rest of the week as I pointed out. On Wednesday we 
begin voting on this budget. On Thursday we hopefully will finish it 
and vote on it.
  Why can we not allow Members to be in one place at one time to focus 
in on one issue, in fact the most important issue we will have to deal 
with probably in this session, debating this, in my view, an outrageous 
Republican budget resolution?
  I think we know why: because it is indefensible.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. 
Dingell].
  Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, the House is going to make a decision on 
the budget for 7 years. Every year between now and the year 2002 is 
going to be affected by the actions that are going to be taken on the 
House floor. We are going to deal with policy. We are going to deal 
with economics. We are going to deal with interest rates.
  Mr. Speaker, we are going to deal with employment. We are going to 
deal with Social Security. We are going to deal with economic issues. 
We are going to deal with the level of Federal expenditures. We are 
going to affect the rights and concerns of every American, from the 
very young to the very oldest and from the unborn to the dead.
  I think to have these kinds of discussions and these kinds of 
decisions made while the committees and the subcommittees are marking 
up important matters, but matters nowhere near as important as that 
which we will be discussing today, is absolutely wrong. I would tell my 
colleagues that this resolution should not be agreed to for that 
reason.
  I will also point out something else: This is one example of high-
handedness.

                              {time}  1200

  Another example of high-handedness we will be seeing in the Committee 
on Commerce very shortly. A member has been added to that committee 
without a word of consultation with the leadership on this side of the 
aisle. Very shortly, without any consultation with the leadership on 
this side of the aisle within the committee, members will be having 
their concerns and their interests in the structure of the committees 
and subcommittees of the Committee on Commerce rearranged.
  It is an interesting game that the Republican leadership is playing. 
What it says is that any time the Republican leadership chooses, they 
can change the composition of the teams on the field. If they do not 
like playing football with 11 men, they can put 12 or 13 men on the 
field, simply because they changed the rules, without adding another 
member on this side of the aisle.
  That is an example of arrogance, high-handedness, and quite honestly, 
a series of practices which are totally inconsistent with the 
traditions and practices of this House, where the business, when the 
Democrats were in the 
[[Page H4976]] majority, was always done in consultation with the 
minority, and when we were always exquisitely careful, both on the 
leadership level in the House and on the leadership level in the 
committee, to consult and to afford the Republicans full opportunity to 
be fairly treated and to be heard before actions affecting the 
structure of committees, subcommittees, and of the House, was taken.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to rise up against heavy-
handedness, high-handedness, and arrogance on the part of my Republican 
colleagues in connection with two matters: First, consideration of the 
budget resolution; and second, the structuring of committees and 
subcommittees.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, let me just buttress the arguments made by 
my colleague, the gentleman from Michigan.
  Republicans have put a new member of their party onto the Committee 
on Commerce. We are entitled to another member on that committee. 
However, when our requests are made, they are met with silence. There 
is no response given to us. Business as usual.
  That is what we have here, business as usual. They pass a resolution 
on the first day of the session on committee ratios, saying that we can 
only have two full committees, yet they have 38 Members that serve on 
more than two committees. That question needs to be addressed, and we 
intend to address it in due time.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from California [Mr. Miller].
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman 
from Michigan, the minority whip, for raising this issue.
  I want to say to my colleagues that not only is it a question of 
members of one committee deciding to participate in debate on the floor 
on the budget or on the Clean Water Act or other measures, but we also 
have the situation where members of the Committee on Resources will be 
engaged in markup on the bill while at the same time their committee 
will be engaged in offering bills on the floor of the House under the 
current schedule.
  That disenfranchises members of the committee from one of those two 
debates. They cannot participate and represent their constituent views 
in committee, or they cannot participate on the floor and represent 
their constituent views on those bills presented on this floor.
  The same holds true for each and every member. This disenfranchises 
Republicans and Democrats alike, because if we have to go to committee 
to participate, we cannot be heard on the budget debate, we cannot be 
heard on the clean water debate. These are major, controversial, 
important actions, taken by this Congress.
  I think the minority whip has it about right, that they seek to 
submarine this debate. The reports are coming in from the precincts. 
The American people are terribly upset by what the Republicans are 
doing to Medicare, what they are doing to student loans, and as we saw, 
what they were doing to student nutrition.
  The fact of the matter is, the public does not like this plan, so 
what is their proposal? To disenfranchise Members of Congress from 
participating in this debate, from echoing the views of their 
constituents back home, and to try to keep them locked up in committee 
activity that is nowhere near as urgent or as important as the budget 
debate and or the clean water debate.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for raising this issue.
  Mr. BONIOR. I thank my colleague for his remarks, Mr. Speaker. He is 
right on target.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank].
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, let me make clear we are not 
talking about abstractions here. Last week, Mr. Speaker, we had in the 
Committee on Banking and Financial Services the single silliest day in 
the history, I believe, of the House of Representatives.
  We voted in the Committee on Banking and Financial Services the week 
before to pass out a deregulation bill, but while we were having the 
rollcall on that bill, a rollcall was in progress on the floor of the 
House, because the committee was meeting simultaneously with the floor 
proceedings.
  In fact, the chairman, an honorable man, trying to do his best under 
a set of silly rules, had called a rollcall on an amendment, and he 
announced that there would be a rollcall right after that on the bill. 
Many members, mostly Republicans who voted first on the amendment, did 
not hear that, so they left. They came to the floor.
  As a result, last week, all the members of the Committee on Banking 
and Financial Services interrupted what we were doing, those who had 
gotten the notice, and we sat in the Committee on Banking and Financial 
Services and we pretended to vote on the banking bill. The only reason 
we had that meeting to vote on the banking bill was that the week 
before we had a simultaneous rollcall in committee and a rollcall on 
the floor. Some of the Republican Members were distressed because, 
having left to vote on the floor rollcall, they missed the rollcall in 
committee. That is what we are inviting when we have simultaneous 
rollcalls on both levels, we get this kind of problem.
  Mr. Speaker, it was the Republicans who insisted that the chairman of 
the committee have this phony meeting. We all sat there, it was like a 
play, and we all voted. It was the silliest waste of time ever. Why? 
Because of this kind of tactic.
  Therefore, what we have here is that the Republicans took power in 
January and announced this wonderful contract and all these rules 
changes, but we should have checked the warranty on the contract, 
because apparently, on the rules changes, it was good only until 
inconvenient. I have never seen people profess good intentions, as they 
define them, and so little live up to them as we have seen here.
  The kind of burlesque that we had in the Committee on Banking and 
Financial Services last week, where we
 had a rollcall vote, a solemn rollcall vote solely because some 
Republican Members had missed the previous rollcall vote because there 
was another rollcall vote going on was silly, but what the Republican 
leadership wants to do is to create the circumstances in which that 
silliness will recur.

  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, to conclude, let me just ask my friends and 
colleagues today, please do not put themselves in the situation where 
they are not here defending the interests of their constituents by 
being away, by being at another markup, by being at another hearing, on 
the most important piece of legislation that we will consider perhaps 
this year, the budget of the United States of America, that will have 
serious consequences for seniors, for students, for middle-aged 
children who have to support seniors; an important bill.
  Let us not play Casper the Ghost and have people participating in one 
or two different places at the same time. Let the sunshine pour through 
these Chambers so every Member can be here, can participate, and can be 
a full participant in the democratic process.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote against this motion, and to 
give themselves the affordability and the comfort of being able to 
participate in the budget debate.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, if I can just take a moment to put back into perspective 
a point that has been stretched beyond belief, what we are doing here 
is asking the Members to vote to enable the committees to sit during 
the 5-minute rule while we continue to work on the Clean Water Act.
  In particular, the work that we want to see continue in committees 
while we are on the Clean Water Act on the floor is the hearings of the 
Committee on Commerce on telecommunications, which has been the only 
objection that has been raised.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the motion.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Armey].
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore [Mr. Barrett of 
Nebraska] announced that the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a 
quorum 
[[Page H4977]] 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.
  The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
  This will be a 15-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 235, 
nays 181, not voting 18, as follows:
                             [Roll No. 331]

                               YEAS--235

     Allard
     Archer
     Armey
     Bachus
     Baker (CA)
     Baker (LA)
     Ballenger
     Barr
     Barrett (NE)
     Bartlett
     Barton
     Bass
     Bateman
     Bereuter
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bliley
     Blute
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bono
     Brownback
     Bryant (TN)
     Bunn
     Bunning
     Burr
     Burton
     Buyer
     Callahan
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canady
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chambliss
     Chenoweth
     Christensen
     Chrysler
     Clinger
     Coble
     Coburn
     Collins (GA)
     Combest
     Condit
     Crane
     Crapo
     Cremeans
     Cubin
     Cunningham
     Davis
     Deal
     DeLay
     Diaz-Balart
     Dickey
     Doolittle
     Dornan
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Ehrlich
     Emerson
     English
     Ensign
     Everett
     Ewing
     Fawell
     Fields (TX)
     Flanagan
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fowler
     Fox
     Franks (CT)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frisa
     Funderburk
     Gallegly
     Ganske
     Gekas
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gilman
     Goodlatte
     Goodling
     Goss
     Graham
     Greenwood
     Gunderson
     Gutknecht
     Hall (TX)
     Hancock
     Hansen
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Heineman
     Herger
     Hilleary
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Hoke
     Horn
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hunter
     Hutchinson
     Hyde
     Inglis
     Jacobs
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Kasich
     Kelly
     Kim
     King
     Kingston
     Klug
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Largent
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Laughlin
     Lazio
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Lightfoot
     Linder
     Livingston
     LoBiondo
     Longley
     Lucas
     Manzullo
     Martini
     McCollum
     McCrery
     McDade
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntosh
     McKeon
     Metcalf
     Meyers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Molinari
     Montgomery
     Moorhead
     Morella
     Myers
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neumann
     Ney
     Norwood
     Nussle
     Oxley
     Packard
     Parker
     Paxon
     Petri
     Pombo
     Portman
     Pryce
     Quillen
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Riggs
     Roberts
     Rogers
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roth
     Roukema
     Royce
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Saxton
     Scarborough
     Schaefer
     Schiff
     Seastrand
     Sensenbrenner
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Shuster
     Skeen
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Solomon
     Souder
     Spence
     Stearns
     Stockman
     Stump
     Talent
     Tate
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Thomas
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Torkildsen
     Traficant
     Upton
     Vucanovich
     Waldholtz
     Walker
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Watts (OK)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     White
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Zeliff
     Zimmer

                               NAYS--181

     Abercrombie
     Andrews
     Baesler
     Baldacci
     Barcia
     Barrett (WI)
     Becerra
     Beilenson
     Bentsen
     Bevill
     Bishop
     Bonior
     Borski
     Brewster
     Browder
     Brown (CA)
     Brown (FL)
     Brown (OH)
     Bryant (TX)
     Cardin
     Chapman
     Clay
     Clayton
     Clement
     Clyburn
     Coleman
     Collins (MI)
     Conyers
     Costello
     Cramer
     Danner
     de la Garza
     DeFazio
     DeLauro
     Dellums
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Dixon
     Doggett
     Dooley
     Doyle
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Fazio
     Fields (LA)
     Filner
     Flake
     Foglietta
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Furse
     Gejdenson
     Gephardt
     Geren
     Gibbons
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Green
     Gutierrez
     Hall (OH)
     Hamilton
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Hefner
     Hilliard
     Hinchey
     Holden
     Jackson-Lee
     Jefferson
     Johnson (SD)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (MA)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kennelly
     Kildee
     Klink
     LaFalce
     Lantos
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lincoln
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Luther
     Maloney
     Manton
     Markey
     Martinez
     Mascara
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McDermott
     McHale
     McKinney
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek
     Menendez
     Mfume
     Miller (CA)
     Mineta
     Minge
     Mink
     Moakley
     Mollohan
     Moran
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Neal
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Orton
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne (NJ)
     Payne (VA)
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pickett
     Pomeroy
     Poshard
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reynolds
     Richardson
     Rivers
     Roemer
     Rose
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Sabo
     Sanders
     Sawyer
     Schroeder
     Schumer
     Scott
     Serrano
     Sisisky
     Skaggs
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Stokes
     Studds
     Stupak
     Tanner
     Taylor (MS)
     Tejeda
     Thompson
     Thornton
     Thurman
     Torres
     Towns
     Velazquez
     Vento
     Visclosky
     Volkmer
     Ward
     Waters
     Watt (NC)
     Waxman
     Williams
     Wise
     Woolsey
     Wyden
     Wynn
     Yates

                             NOT VOTING--18

     Ackerman
     Berman
     Boucher
     Collins (IL)
     Cooley
     Cox
     Coyne
     Evans
     Franks (NJ)
     Hoyer
     Istook
     Johnston
     Kleczka
     Lipinski
     Peterson (FL)
     Porter
     Torricelli
     Tucker

                              {time}  1227

  So the motion was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  

                          ____________________
```