[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 66 (Tuesday, May 24, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: May 24, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
PERMISSION TO CONSIDER AMENDMENT NO. 2 AS SUBSTITUTE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 
  1 IN PART 4 OF HOUSE REPORT 103-520 ON H.R. 4301, NATIONAL DEFENSE 
                 AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995

  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 
2 in part 4 of House Report 103-520 be considered as a substitute 
amendment for amendment No. 1 in part 4.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I yield to the 
distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] to explain what 
it is he is trying to accomplish.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, it was the clear intent of the Committee on 
Rules, as shown by the committee's document entitled, ``Proposed Second 
Rule'' of May 20 at 1:30 p.m. The report itself is ambiguous, and this 
request is intended only to clarify the situation.
  Mr. Speaker, my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. Goss], is the author of an amendment relating to foreign policy 
matters with respect to Haiti. This gentleman offered an amendment that 
was intended to be an amendment in the nature of a substitute. The 
Committee on Rules intended for this to be the case, but their report 
was ambiguous on the matter.
  Mr. Speaker, this unanimous consent request is simply a desire to 
clarify that the gentleman from California would have an opportunity to 
offer an amendment in the nature of a substitute to my distinguished 
colleague's amendment.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I thank 
the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Armed Services for that 
explanation.
  Part of the problem that we have had with this is the order that we 
are going to take these matters up, and part of the understanding that 
the chairman has referred to in those records of the Committee on Rules 
was that we would deal with the Haiti issue before we broke, presumably 
by the end of this week, and I wonder if the distinguished chairman 
could give me assurances that we are going to deal with this Haiti 
amendment series in the immediate future and certainly before the end 
of this week.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GOSS. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, it would be the intent of this gentleman 
and my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. 
Spence], to dispose of this matter this evening. It would be our intent 
to debate the issue and have a vote on the issue on the floor of the 
House on this matter before we adjourn tonight.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I thank 
the distinguished chairman, and I yield to the distinguished ranking 
member, the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] who would like 
to ask an additional question if it is appropriate under my reservation 
of objections.
  Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to have an understanding 
that we are also going to discuss peacekeeping.
  Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, the gentleman 
from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] is absolutely correct.
  Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman is aware, as I understand it as of this 
moment, the amendment dealing with Bosnia, by unanimous agreement or 
agreement among a number of parties here, that issue would be pulled 
from the floor. But as I understand it, Mr. Speaker, we will go 
forward. It is the intent of the Chair to go forward on the issue of 
base closure, C-17, Haiti and peacekeeping.
  Does that answer the gentleman's question?
  Mr. SPENCE. Yes, Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California has 
answered the question.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, that certainly takes care of my concerns, so I 
withdraw my reservation of objection.
  Mr. SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________