Date: 2007-12-17
Speaker: LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. Id like to thank my friend. the distinguithed chairwoman of the Rules Committee. for the time. and I yield myself such time as I may consume. This morning I woke up to the news that the majority had posted on the Rules Committee Web site the omnibus appropriations bill that we are considering tonight. The majority posted this bill. approximately 3.500page bill. after many Members had retired for the night. So that effectively made it impossible for many of us to even begin to see what was in this legislation obviously until many hours after that. When the new majority took over. they promised. Mr. Speaker. that they would give at least 24 hours to review legislation before it comes to the floor for a vote. The rules of the House require 3 days. Oftentimes the Rules Committee through the years has waived that requirement. and thats why its very interesting to note and I think very relevant to note that the majority made a promise that at least 24 hours would be provided for. Members to review. to attempt to understand legislation to make sure that the legislation doesnt have provisions that Members would oppose. During testimony 2 weeks ago at the Rules Committee. Members from the minority expressed our concern with the prospect that the majority would rush through a very large appropriation bill spending. as in this case. approximately a half a trillion dollars without giving Members time to properly read and understand the bill. One particular area of concern was with the possible inclusion of earmarks that Members would not have an opportunity to review before voting on them. On the opening day of the 110th Congress. the distinguished chairwoman of the Rules Committee. Ms. SLAUGHTER. addressed the House to speak about the majoritys changes to the House rules. During her speech. she addressed the issue of earmarks and how the majority claimed to deal with the issue. Today. as we consider this rule for this omnibus bill. I think its appropriate to look -back and see what the distinguished chairwoman said the majority would do to bring transparency to the earmark process. "The rules that Thomas Jefferson first wrote down two centuries ago provide for order and discipline in the House. They provide for transparency and accountability. If they are followed. corruption will be exposed before it has a chance to take root. Democrats are going to follow the longestablished rules of the House. instead of treating them as impediments to be avoided. We are going to allow Members to read bills before voting on them and prevent them from being altered at the last minute. "The rules package will finally shed light on an earmarking process that has greased the wheels of corrupt House machinery. It requires the full disclosure of earmarks on all bills and conference reports before Members are asked to vote on them." -Now. "Mr. Speaker. lets compare those promises with todays. rule. The rule provides .for. consideration of this legislation. H.R. 2764. But because the majority is moving the appropriations bill as an amendment between Houses and not a conference report. the bill will fall squarely within one of the loopholes to the earmark rule. and the rules of the House will not require any disclosure of earmarks that may be contained in the legislation. So this bill is not subject to the earmark rulewhich the majority claimed would bring transparency and accountability to the earmark process. The majority should not be asking Members to vote on a bill that may include numerous earmarks that no one has vetted and no one has seen. Weve already seen this loophole in action when we debated H.R. 6. the energy bill. The legislation came to the floor also as an amendment between the Houses. and as such. it too was exempt from the earmark rule. Yet it included earmarks that were not discovered until after passage. So. yes. the majority "directs the Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations to insert in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD at any time during the remainder of the first session of the 110th -Congress such material as he may deem explanatory of appropriations measures for the fiscal year." but there may be problems with that provision. I did see that the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee did list earmarks in the bill. but the requirement does not say exactly what material the chairman is required to insert. just what "he may deem explanatory." It does not require him to list all earmarks. So earmarks in the bill could have been omitted from the statement. Second. the provision allows the chairman to insert the explanation time during the first session of the 110th Congress. So in theory. the chairman may still have some time to insert an explanation after both Houses of Congress pass the legislation and the President signs the legislation into law. We were so concerned with this procedural loophole during a recent markup that in the Rules Committee Mr. DREIER offered an amendment to the rule to require that the chairman of the Appropriations Committee provide the list of earmarks -required by clause 9 of rule XXI for the omnibus appropriations bill. Unfortunately. that amendment to the rule was rejected along partisan lines. Because of this loophole in the earmark rule. I. along with Mr. DREIER.