[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 25, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: January 25, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
       INTRODUCTION OF RULE FOR CONSIDERATION OF BALANCED BUDGET 
                        CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

                                 ______


                        HON. CHARLES W. STENHOLM

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, January 25, 1994

  Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, today Bob Smith, L.F. Payne, Olympia 
Snowe, Joe Kennedy, Jim Inhofe, Joe Barton, Jon Kyl and I are 
introducing a rule for the consideration of House Joint Resolution 103, 
the Balanced Budget Constitutional Amendment. The rule that we are 
introducing will ensure that we have a full, fair and open debate on 
this extremely important issue of amending the Constitution.
  In drafting this rule, we felt it was imperative that there be a full 
airing of all views within this body about the subject. We felt that it 
is important that there be fair representation along party lines, as 
well as some representation of the degree of support among House 
Members. Finally, we felt that the amendments chosen should reflect the 
leading ideas for balanced budget amendments. This rule meets these 
criteria. We believe that this rule sets out a framework for 
consideration of the balanced budget amendment that is fair to all 
sides of this important issue.
  The rule that we are introducing is essentially the same rule that 
was approved by the House for the consideration of the amendment in 
June 1992. It would provide for 9 hours of general debate and allow for 
the consideration of as many as five substitute amendments comprising 
all of the major alternative approaches to the issue: an amendment by 
Representative Jon Kyl; an amendment by Representative Jack Brooks, 
chairman of the Judiciary Committee; an amendment by Representative Joe 
Barton; the text of a Senate-passed amendment, if any; and an amendment 
by Representatives Stenholm and Smith. the amendments would be 
considered under a ``king of the hill'' procedure in which the last-
passed amendment will be voted on for final passage.
  In addition to establishing a framework for consideration of the 
balanced budget amendment, introduction of this rule today underscores 
our commitment to pursue a discharge petition if one is necessary. I do 
not believe that it will be necessary to file a discharge petition in 
order to obtain a vote on the balanced budget amendment, but we wanted 
to have the discharge option available if circumstances convince us 
that a discharge petition is the best way to obtain a vote on the 
amendment.
  The 262 Members of this body who have cosponsored House Joint 
Resolution 103 have indicted the urgency they feel about the need to 
gain some control of a Federal debt which is reaching frightening 
proportions. Mr. Speaker, the American people, over 75 percent of whom 
support a balanced budget amendment, want action on a balanced budget 
amendment. I am confident that the House will take action on the 
amendment and that we will vote to send this issue to the States for 
the ratification process. The rule we introduce today moves us one step 
farther in that direction.

                          ____________________