[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 31 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H1890-H1891]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
(Mr. GEPHARDT asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute.)
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of my request is to inquire
about the schedule for next week.
I yield to the gentleman from Texas, the distinguished majority
leader.
Mr. ARMEY. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
With respect to next week, Mr. Speaker, the House will not be in
session on Monday, February 20.
The House will be in session on Tuesday, February 21. Subject to
unanimous-consent request, the House will meet at 12:30 p.m. for
morning hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. At 5 p.m., we will
take up the rule for H.R. 831, the Permanent Extension of the 25
Percent Health Insurance Deduction for Self-Employed Individuals. We
will then move into general debate and complete consideration of the
bill. This is important, Mr. Speaker: We expect no votes until 5 p.m.
on Tuesday. However, we will complete consideration of H.R. 831 on
Tuesday. Members should be advised that the House may work late on
Tuesday night.
On Wednesday, February 22, the House will meet at 11 a.m. for the
legislative business. We will take up the rule for the Department of
Defense supplemental and the rescission package which accompanies it,
and then move into general debate. We will complete consideration of
the two bills and then possibly take up H.R. 830, the Paperwork
Reduction Act, subject to the House's approval of a rule. Members
should be advised that the House may work late on Wednesday night.
On Thursday, February 23, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for
legislative business, and pending the outcome of the previous day's
action on H.R. 830, we will take up the rule for H.R. 450, the
Regulatory Transition Act of 1995, and then move into general debate on
the measure.
On Friday, February 24, the House will meet at 10 a.m. for
legislative business. At that time we will complete consideration of
H.R. 450. It is our hope to complete legislation by 3 that afternoon.
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, perhaps I could ask a
few questions.
First on staying late. The gentleman said perhaps on Tuesday and on
Wednesday. By ``late,'' can you give Members a sense of about what
time?
Mr. ARMEY. If the gentleman will yield further, these things are
always problematic. But I think I generally hope when I say ``late,''
that I mean around 9 p.m.
What we try to do is measure the rate at which we are getting the
work done, juxtapose that against what must need be done the next day,
and then set a mark as early as we can that will assure us to be able
to
complete the next day's work. But by ``late,'' I hope that I can
always have some confidence that that means 9. As the gentleman knows,
that has not always worked out that way.
Mr. GEPHARDT. Can the gentleman say that he expects to start
amendments on H.R. 450 on Thursday? Do you intend to get to the
amendments on that bill on Thursday?
Mr. ARMEY. If the gentleman will yield, the answer is yes.
Mr. GEPHARDT. The other question really involves the rules and maybe
the distinguished gentleman from the Committee on Rules could be
involved in this discussion.
We last week met with the requirement to deal with an open rule but
in
[[Page H1891]] a constrained time period of 10 hours. I don't want to
go over that debate again. I think we have well covered that from both
viewpoints. But I guess I am asking what we can expect on the rules
next week.
What kind of a rule would the gentleman expect on the defense
supplemental and the rescission bills? Will they be governed under one
rule and will that rule be open and be time limited? And the rule on
the regulatory transition moratorium, would that be an open rule and
would it be time limited?
Mr. SOLOMON. If the gentleman will yield, the two rescission bills,
we have not put out a rule as the gentleman knows and we will not be
doing that until a rule meeting that I will call sometime late Tuesday
afternoon or evening. We would probably have a time constraint on that.
The rule that we will be putting out as far as the regulatory reform,
we have not discussed that yet. I assume there would be an open rule
with time constraints, again because of the problem as we approach the
April 8 date. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. Armey] our majority leader,
and the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Gingrich] our Speaker, have said we
have to stick to the schedule to make sure we are going to get the
Members out by that 3-week break period.
Mr. GEPHARDT. Reclaiming my time, you are saying in both the case of
the supplemental and the rescission bills and the case of regulatory
transition, you are anticipating, and I understand you have not done it
yet, but you are anticipating open rules with time restraints?
Mr. SOLOMON. That is what we have in mind. Again, with consultation
with the minority, we will keep in touch with you and make that
determination early next week.
Mr. GEPHARDT. Finally, maybe I did not hear it. I was asking about
whether the defense supplemental and the rescission bills would be
governed under one rule.
Mr. SOLOMON. Yes, they will. They will be brought to the floor under
one rule, and debated the same day.
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania
[Mr. Kanjorski].
Mr. KANJORSKI. For purpose of inquiry to the majority leader, Mr.
Leader, as you know last week I expressed my great concern about having
markups on very important bills in the committee and having amendments
on the floor to legislation going at the same time and I felt that we
were losing the benefit of the deliberative nature of the House of
Representatives.
I have conceded as I have indicated before that we will probably
suffer that as long as we are under the constraints to accomplish
something for public relations over 100 days as opposed to substantive
legislative purposes.
Knowing that to be the case, however, the rumors circulating in the
House, it is the intention of the majority to interfere with what I
call communications of representatives with their district, in that you
intend to hold the House in session on Saturdays during the month of
March. Is that correct?
Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. ARMEY. Let me begin by observing that the gentleman's point is
taken.
Mr. Speaker, we are working on a March schedule. We have a great deal
of work to do and we have, as you know, a very compressed time period
in which to do it. We are working on a March schedule. We are trying to
consult with everybody and take into consideration a very wide range of
concerns, not the least of which are the physical demands of the
schedule on our Members. We have every hope and intention of avoiding
working on weekends, Saturdays and Sundays in March, or for that matter
we would hope at all.
Clearly it is our hope and our design to avoid that. We think that is
possible and I am very optimistic.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman further yield?
Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. KANJORSKI. That is not quite the Shermanesque statement I had
hoped to get from the majority leader. It seems to me the majority
leader is saying that the 100 days is more important than allowing the
membership to communicate with our constituents. We have given up the
thought process in the House, we have given up our deliberative
activity in the House. I do not think it is fair to the American people
or the traditions of this institution to give up the ability to
communicate with our constituents on weekends.
Is there some magic in this 100 days that we could not continue and
not have a 3-week break in April, and make it a 2-week break or a 1-
week break so that we could continue over the period of March and April
to communicate with our constituents?
Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. ARMEY. Again the gentleman's point is taken.
I can only tell the gentleman, we have made it very clear, we have a
contract, we feel strongly about our commitment. We are certainly
committed to doing a big job, a big change. We know it is hard work. We
intend to keep that commitment.
The gentleman should be advised that it should hardly come as any new
news to anyone that these circumstances are existent and they will be
met.
We intend to meet the completion of this legislative agenda in the
appointed time with all due respect and with every bit of sensitive
consideration for the needs of the Members.
{time} 1440
And we will do the best we can do to get that done. And again, I do
the best, if the gentleman will yield further, Mr. Speaker, I do the
best I can to control what I can control and to deal with what I cannot
control.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Just a final request.
Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
Mr. KANJORSKI. I indicated about 2 weeks ago on the floor that I do
not think there is going to be any surprise that the majority
entertains a majority of approximately 240 votes more or less, and that
all of the legislation the majority wishes to adopt in the House of
Representatives will be able to be completed and concluded to its
intentions.
It seems to me that rather than now interfere with our relationship
and our communications with our constituents, since the debate process
really is not for the purposes of communicating with our constituents,
or educating our constituents or ourselves for that matter, why do we
not just move along with the 100-day contract over the next 2 weeks,
bring it in under an hour closed rule and have it adopted so that we
can get this foolishness out of the way and get on to the serious
substantial business of the House of Representatives.
Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, will the Speaker yield?
Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. ARMEY. If the gentleman could get his leadership on his side to
endorse his procedural recommendation, I would be happy to take it
under consideration.
____________________