[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 96 (Thursday, July 21, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 21, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]


                              {time}  1110
 
PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE--RETURNING TO THE SENATE S. 729, LEAD EXPOSURE 
                         REDUCTION ACT OF 1994

  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of the privileges of 
the House.
  Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 486) and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the resolution.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 486

       Resolved, That the bill of the Senate (S. 729) to amend the 
     Toxic Substances Control Act to reduce the levels of lead in 
     the environment, and for other purposes, in the opinion of 
     this House, contravenes the first clause of the seventh 
     section of the first article of the Constitution of the 
     United States and is an infringement of the privileges of 
     this House and that such bill be respectfully returned to the 
     Senate with a message communicating this resolution.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Wise). In the opinion of the Chair, the 
resolution constitutes a question of privilege.
  The gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons] will be recognized for 30 
minutes, and the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Hancock] will be 
recognized for 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons].
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 486 returns to the Senate the bill, S. 
729, because it contravenes the constitutional requirement that revenue 
measures originate in the House of Representatives.
  S. 729 amends the Toxic Substances Control Act to restrict the levels 
of lead contained in various products, authorizes appropriations for 
lead testing, and contains other provisions to reduce lead exposure. 
Title I of S. 729 contains a number of provisions which prohibit the 
import of specific categories of products which contain more than 
specified quantities of lead as identified by the Administrator of the 
Environmental Protection Agency. The product categories potentially 
subject to the import ban are broad, including paints, toys and game 
pieces, curtain weights, inks, glass coatings, lead solder, and 
plumbing fittings and fixtures, as well as new motor vehicles or parts 
coated with a paint or primer exceeding the permitted lead content 
levels.
  The import prohibitions are a change in our tariff laws and 
constitute a revenue measure in the constitutional sense, because they 
would have a direct and potentially significant effect on customs 
revenues.
  There are numerous precedents for taking the action I am requesting. 
For example, on February 25, 1992, the House returned to the Senate S. 
884, requiring the President to impose sanctions, including import 
restrictions against countries that fail to eliminate largescale 
driftnet fishing. On October 31, 1991, the House returned to the Senate 
S. 320, including provisions imposing, or authorizing imposition of, a 
ban on imports in connection with export administration. On June 16, 
1988, the House returned to the Senate S. 1748, prohibiting all imports 
from Iran.
  Mr. Speaker, adoption of this resolution is intended solely to 
protect the constitutional prerogative of the House to originate 
revenue matters. I want to make it clear to all Members that our action 
today does not constitute a rejection of the Senate bill on its merits. 
Rather, it makes clear to the Senate that the appropriate procedure for 
dealing with tariff measures that affect revenues is for the House to 
act first on a revenue bill and the Senate to add its amendments and 
seek a conference.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HANCOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution.
  I agree with the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Gibbons] that the 
procedure we are following does not constitute a rejection of the 
provision in question on its merits.
  The resolution simply tells the other body that we must insist on 
respecting the constitutional requirement that this and all other 
revenue measures originate in the House of Representatives.
  The resolution is procedural in nature--not substantive. It is, 
however, an important procedure that preserves the responsibilities of 
the House of Represenatives on revenue matters.
  Certainly the Senate sponsors are free to seek an appropriate vehicle 
for consideration of the provision which has caused us to take this 
action today.
  In this form, however, we must insist on preserving the prerogatives 
of the House.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I 
yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on 
the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________