[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 108 (Monday, August 8, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 8, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. WALKER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I take this time to address the House for 
the purpose of asking the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Moakley] a 
question.
  Did I understand the gentleman at the beginning of his statement to 
indicate there would be four bills permitted by the rule?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. This is on Superfund.
  Mr. WALKER. This is strictly Superfund? We are not talking the health 
care bill?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. If the gentleman will yield, indirectly we are talking 
health care, because as soon as we clean up the Superfund, we will not 
have to get any more medicine.
  Mr. WALKER. Could the gentleman give us any more guidance on the 
health care bill? In his announcement of last week, he indicated that 
hearings would be held.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. If the gentleman will yield, earlier today we extended 
the deadline for printing in the Record from Monday until Wednesday.
  Mr. WALKER. Does that still assume that we will have the Committee on 
Rules meeting on health care yet this week?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. That is what we are trying to do, yes.
  Mr. WALKER. The plan would be to report a health care rule by Friday 
of this week?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. It all depends how many people testify before C-SPAN up 
to our committee.
  Mr. WALKER. Well, assuming that there might be a few people that 
would want to do that, given the nature of the health care bill, does 
the gentleman have any kind of timeframe in mind here?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. We could very well have over 100 Members testifying.
  Mr. WALKER. One of the concerns that is being expressed by a number 
of Members on our side is the fact that by the time you get to these 
hearings, and if the bills are not filed until Wednesday, how are we 
going to be able to know what individual amendments might be brought 
into the health rule process, because they would have to relate to the 
specifics of the bills that are introduced on Wednesday?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. I am sure the membership will have at least 2 days to 
look at the bill. Maybe the CBO estimates may not be up-to-date.
  Mr. WALKER. At that point they would still be eligible for the 
individual amendments?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Yes.
  Mr. WALKER. The submission of individual amendments would follow the 
period of time after which substitutes have been introduced, is that 
correct?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. WALKER. So if I am hearing the gentleman correctly, we could be 
into early next week then before a lot of this kind of thing can be 
resolved.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. We are trying to meet this week.
  Mr. WALKER. You are hoping to have the individual amendments?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Next week, right.
  Mr. PICKLE. If the gentleman will yield, give me the name of the bill 
again?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Superfund is now H.R. 4916.
  Mr. PICKLE. I assume that both of these committees, the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce and the Committee on Public Works and 
Transportation, will refer that bill to the Committee on Ways and Means 
for funding?
   Mr. MOAKLEY. I do not know.
  Mr. PICKLE. Can you tell me when the Committee on Ways and Means will 
get the bill?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. I understand the Committee on Ways and Means is marking 
up on Wednesday.
  Mr. PICKLE. We will get the bill by Wednesday then?
  Mr. MOAKLEY. That is the plan.
  Mr. GINGRICH. If the gentleman will yield, I just wanted to comment, 
and possibly the distinguished Committee on Rules chairman would like 
to comment, because I think there was some confusion in a press story I 
saw last week. We had at one point talked about friendly amendments, 
which I assumed would be in writing well in advance. I am now talking 
about next week, when you get to writing the second rule on the health 
bill.
  There seems to be some confusion though. I think it was in a press 
conference the Speaker had, about the concept of being able to offer a 
brand new amendment next Friday that might well be virtually a 
substantial substitute or a substantial change in one of the bills on 
the last day, an hour or two before we voted.
  I would just wonder if the Committee on Rules chairman could assure 
the House that, as it often has in the past when it insists on 
amendments being printed in the Record, prior to our going to the 
Committee on Rules next week any amendment that would be made to 
something as large as the health bill would have to be printed in the 
Record prior to going to the Committee on Rules, so that everyone would 
be playing from the same deck of cards and we would not be faced with a 
magic amendment on the last day.
  I wonder if the distinguished chairman might comment on the 
procedures to be followed.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. To answer the gentleman from Georgia, I, too, was in the 
room when they talked about friendly amendments. I have not heard 
anything to the contrary. Any of these amendments that would be allowed 
after they are printed in the Record would be anything but friendly. 
But I have not talked to the Speaker today.
  Mr. GINGRICH. If the gentleman will yield further, let me just 
clarify my concern and see if we cannot get some agreement, if not 
today, then maybe by tomorrow.
  When we had that initial discussion, it was because the speed of 
drafting was so dramatic that it was a danger that any of the people 
offering a bill could have had something technically written that was 
just stupid, and we would want to be able to clean up the bill and not 
be trapped into some kind of a dumb debate over something clearly not 
intended.
  It has been brought to my attention since then that some Members, 
many Members, are afraid that they could discover next Friday, the last 
day we are in session for the summer, that on the last bill to be 
brought up, that a brand new, never before printed totally new 
amendment, might be brought to the floor with the permission of the 
Committee on Rules.
  My problem would be that I would hope before the final rule was 
written, that every amendment that was going to be voted on next week 
would already be in writing, which I would assume would be on Tuesday, 
so that everybody would have time to study every amendment and we would 
not be faced with a sudden, magic, clean slate amendment that nobody 
studied, no experts analyzed, and nobody understood.

                              {time}  1800

  I wondered if in that sense there might be a preprinting requirement.
  Mr. MOAKLEY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, as 
I stated before, I am just aware of friendly amendments being made in 
order, which would do exactly what the gentleman from Georgia said, 
that because of CBO racing through it or legislative counsel, we would 
need to put a technical amendment in there. Other than that, all the 
other amendments, substitutes would have to be printed in the Record.
  Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.

                          ____________________