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

Madam Speaker. I would like to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for the time. and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker. "I rise in strong opposition to this martial law rule and in opposition to the outrageous process that continues to plague this House. We have before us a martial law rule that allows the leadership to once again ignore the rules of the House and the procedures and the traditions of this House. Martial law is no way to run a democracy no matter what your ideology. no matter what your party affiliation." Madam Speaker. those are not my words. those are the words of the gentleman from Massachusetts. He spoke those words on the floor on several occasions last year regarding what he eloquently called a "martial law rule." So. although they are not my words. they are quite relevant to this debate. Since I have already used some of the gentlemans words. I will continue to point out one more comment that the gentleman made on martial law rules. I think this one quote is particularly interesting because it was given on December 7. 2006. just a month before the Democrats took control of the House of Representatives. It speaks about how the Democrats proposed to run the House. and it is in sharp contrast to how they are actually running the House. This is what the gentleman said: "There is a better way to run this body. The truth is that the American people expect and deserve better. That is why the 110th Congress must be different. I believe we need to rediscover openness and fairness in this House. We must insist on full and fair debates on the issues that come before this body." Now. I ask. Madam Speaker. where is that openness and fairness my colleague spoke about? Where is the openness on the energy bill rule. where over 90 amendments were closed out. including a Republican substitute? Where was that openness when we considered SCHIP reauthorization under two closed rules. shutting out all amendments? Where is that openness today when we are asked to consider a 3.000page omnibus appropriations bill with less than 24 hours to review the legislation? F] 1800 I know where it is. Madam Speaker. They left it on the campaign trail. It was an empty promise. and it became evident that it was a false. hollow promise on the opening day of their new majorjty. when the Democrats wrote into the rules of the House closed rules for the consideration of the first six bills that they were to take up. in effect discharging the Rules Committee from its duties for the first six bills they were to bring to the floor. So their remedy for examples of unfairness they had criticized in the Rules Committee was: no Rules Committee. And that trend. started. sadly. that day. continues to this day. As my colleague has said. yes. and I quote. "There is a better way to run this body. The truth is that the American people expect and deservo better. That is why the 110th Congress must be different. I believe we need to rediscover openness and fairness in this House. We must insist on full and fair debates on the issues that come before this body." Hoyv right my colleague was. With that. Madam Speaker. I reserve the balance of my time.