[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 591 Laid on Table in House (LTH)]







109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 591

           Raising a question of the privileges of the House.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 8, 2005

 Ms. Pelosi submitted the following resolution; which was laid on the 
                                 table

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
           Raising a question of the privileges of the House.

Whereas the recurring practice of improperly holding votes open for the sole 
        purpose of overturning the will of the majority, including bullying and 
        threatening Members to vote against their conscience, has occurred eight 
        times since 2003, and three times in the 109th Congress alone;
Whereas on November 22, 2003, the Republican Leadership held open the vote on 
        H.R. 1, the Prescription Drug Conference Report, for nearly three hours, 
        the longest period of time in the history of electronic voting in the 
        U.S. House of Representatives;
Whereas the normal period of time for a recorded vote is 15 minutes, and the 
        Speaker of the House has reiterated that policy on Opening Day of each 
        Congress by saying, ``The Chair announced, and then strictly enforced, a 
        policy of closing electronic votes as soon as possible after the 
        guaranteed period of 15 minutes'';
Whereas the sole purpose of holding the Prescription Drug vote open was to 
        undermine the will of the House, and reverse the position that a 
        majority of the House of Representatives had taken during the entire 
        vote;
Whereas it was widely reported in the press that former Representative Nick 
        Smith (R-MI) was bribed on the House floor, and the incident was 
        described in Robert Novak's column in the Chicago Sun-Times, November 
        27, 2003: ``Nick Smith was told business interests would give his son 
        $100,000 in return for his father's vote. When he still declined, fellow 
        Republican House members told him they would make sure Brad Smith never 
        came to Congress. After (Rep.) Nick Smith voted no and the bill passed, 
        (Rep.) Duke Cunningham of California and other Republicans taunted him 
        that his son was dead meat'';
Whereas the cost of the Prescription Drug bill was a critical factor in 
        determining the votes of many Members of Congress and Richard S. Foster, 
        the chief actuary for the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services, 
        conducted numerous estimates indicating the cost to be much higher, 
        including a June 11, 2003 analysis of a similar plan in the Senate which 
        would have cost $551 billion over ten years and Members were not made 
        aware of this;
Whereas the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated the cost of the 
        Republican Prescription Drug bill to be $395 billion over ten years and 
        yet, just two months after the vote in Congress, Joshua Bolten, Director 
        of the Office of Management and Budget, disclosed that the 
        Administration's estimate of the cost was actually $534 billion;
Whereas Representative Bill Thomas, the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee 
        and a key negotiator on the bill, told HHS Secretary Thompson on 
        February 10, 2004 in a hearing before the Ways and Means Committee, ``I 
        know some people were surprised that your (HHS) number was higher. I 
        personally was not . . .'' (Hearing Transcript, February 10, 2004);
Whereas Representative Nancy Johnson, the Chairman of the Ways and Means Health 
        Subcommittee and a key negotiator on the bill, said she knew of the 
        higher estimates and stated, ``Absolutely, we knew about these 
        numbers.'' (The New York Times, March 18, 2004);
Whereas the Republican Leadership and the committees of jurisdiction chose to 
        ignore the warnings of higher cost estimates and intentionally misled 
        Members of the House for the sole purpose of winning passage of an 
        extremely controversial bill;
Whereas in a clear conflict of interest the Chairman of the Energy and Commerce 
        Committee, former Representative Billy Tauzin (R-LA), was actively 
        engaged in a job search with the pharmaceutical industry at the same 
        time that he was a key negotiator on major provisions in the bill, and 
        after its passage, he subsequently left Congress to take a highly-paid 
        executive position with the head of the pharmaceutical lobby, and is 
        reportedly making many times his congressional salary;
Whereas the Republican Leadership's submissiveness to the influence of corporate 
        interests, and their illegitimate efforts to overturn the will of the 
        House to pass flawed legislation like the Prescription Drug bill, which 
        was written to meet the needs of drug companies, call into question the 
        legitimacy of the laws they enact and the agenda they pursue; and
Whereas the culture of corruption has so permeated the Republican Leadership 
        that they will violate their own Rules and the customs and decorum of 
        the House to win votes on the floor of the House of Representatives: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House denounces the culture of corruption 
exhibited by the Republican Leadership, denounces the ongoing resort to 
illegitimate actions taken to pass legislation like the Prescription 
Drug bill under false pretenses, rejects the practice of improperly 
holding votes open beyond a reasonable period of time for the sole 
purpose of circumventing the will of the House, and directs the Speaker 
to take such steps as necessary to prevent any further abuse.
                                 <all>