[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 118 (Friday, August 19, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 19, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                E X T E N S I O N   O F   R E M A R K S


                 EMERGENCY SPENDING CONTROL ACT OF 1994

                                 ______


                               speech of

                           HON GARY A. FRANKS

                             of connecticut

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, August 17, 1994

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 4906) to 
     amend the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 
     1974 to limit consideration of nonemergency matters in 
     emergency legislation:

  Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut. Mr. Chairman, during this Congress we have 
approved two emergency spending bills, one in 1993 for the Midwest 
flooding and one earlier this year for the earthquake in Los Angeles. 
Even though these natural disasters did not take place in Connecticut, 
my constituents were willing to have the Federal Government provide 
needed relief to the victims. We can assume that Connecticut residents 
would receive disaster relief should a serious disaster ever occur in 
my State.
  Unfortunately, Congress took advantage of this goodwill and added 
wasteful spending to the emergency spending bills. Fungus research and 
a program to pay for grooming expenses of Los Angeles youth would not 
have been approved if these programs had to stand on their own merits. 
That is why they were included in the emergency spending bills. Even 
more disgraceful, the rules of the House did not allow this waste to be 
deleted from the bill.
  In addition, the two emergency spending bills approved during this 
Congress were never paid for. Congress chose to add the amount spent in 
these bills to the Federal deficit.
  Today, I will support amendments to the emergency spending 
control Act to end the abuse of emergency spending bills. The 
amendments offered by Congressman Sam Johnson of Texas, Congressman 
Castle, and Congressmen Kasich, Stenholm, and Penny would all 
effectively address the abuses that have plagued previous emergency 
spending bills. Under these amendments, emergency spending would no 
longer be added to the deficit and nonemergency items would no longer 
be inserted in emergency bills. The Castle amendment would provide for 
unexpected emergencies by setting aside emergency funds in the annual 
budget process. The Kasich-Stenholm-Penny amendment would outright 
prohibit nonemergency spending in emergency spending bills.

  If these three amendments fail, I will vote for the Spratt amendment, 
which allows any Member of the House to try to eliminate the wasteful 
nonemergency spending in an emergency spending bill. This amendment is 
not as strong as the other three amendments being offered. I feel that 
the nonemergency spending should not be in the bills in the first 
place. But the Spratt amendment is better than the current situation.

                          ____________________