[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 55 (Friday, March 24, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H3790-H3791]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      REQUEST FOR APPOINTMENT OF CONFEREES ON H.R. 889, EMERGENCY 
   SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND RESCISSIONS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF 
                      DEFENSE FOR FISCAL YEAR 1995

  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the 
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 889) making emergency supplemental 
appropriations and rescissions to preserve and enhance the military 
readiness of the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1995, and for other purposes, with Senate amendments 
thereto, disagree to the Senate amendments, and agree to the conference 
asked by the Senate.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Sensenbrenner). Is there objection to 
the request of the gentleman from Louisiana?
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I take this 
time to simply note that for the last 2 days, this side of the aisle 
has been trying to find out what the process would be by which we would 
go to conference, who would be on that conference, and when this motion 
would be made.
  It was not until literally 2 or 3 minutes ago that I was informed 
what the decision had been. No opportunity was given to me to consult 
the members of my committee who would not be contemplated as being 
conferees and no consultation was made on this side of the aisle about 
the wisdom of dividing conferees between the defense conference and the 
domestic conference, even though it is the apparent intention of the 
majority party to raid domestic programs in order to finance defense 
add-ons.
  It was explained to us that the Speaker was even considering the 
unprecedented action of reducing the number of Democratic conferees 
below the ratio that we hold on the committee in order to provide a 
stacked deck for the conference. We had no knowledge about who would be 
on the conference until just several moments ago.
  Given the fact that I have had no opportunity at all to consult with 
Members on my side of the aisle and given the fact that the majority 
party apparently intends to go to conference on Tuesday and given the 
fact that they can still do that if they wait until next week to make 
this motion, I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.
  (Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute.)
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman from Wisconsin readily 
knows, for the last 40 years it has been the rules of this House for 
the Speaker of the House to determine the conferees, and we have 
always, as Members of the former minority, been told who the conferees 
would be and have had to adhere to the restrictions laid down by the 
Speaker.
  But the gentleman also might know that I hold in my hand a list of 
proposed conferees dated March 23, 1995, which we gave to the gentleman 
as far back as yesterday----
  Mr. OBEY. Two minutes ago.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Yesterday the gentleman had this exact list, either 
directly or through his staff. It is exactly what we have been talking 
with the Speaker about and have gotten agreement on.
  The gentleman's objections are way off base. I would simply urge all 
Members to let us go to conference as rapidly as possible.
  (Mr. OBEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would simply note with all due respect to my 
friend the gentleman from Louisiana, that it is true that we were given 
a tenative list of conferees yesterday but at the same time we were 
told by persons on that side of the aisle that the Speaker was 
contemplating changing 
[[Page H3791]] that list. We were told we would be notified when the 
decision was made so we would have an opportunity to discuss that issue 
with our side of the aisle and were given no such opportunity.
  I feel we are perfectly within our rights to object because of the 
way this has been handled.
  Mr. LIVINGTSTON. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. Surely.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. The gentleman is free to object, but the fact is that 
the identical list of proposed conferees that was given his staff 
yesterday has been agreed to.
  The Speaker under 40 years of Democrat rule of the House of 
Representatives had taken it unto himself to have sole prerogative over 
who the conferees are. That has not changed. I am at a loss to 
understand how the gentleman has been put out of sorts by the agreement 
on a list that his staff had yesterday.
  I am reminded, to go one step further, that the gentleman from 
California [Mr. Miller] once called a conference, adjourned the House, 
went back to the Cloakroom, confected the conference, reported out the 
reports of the conference all within the space of 2 minutes, and the 
minority was given no opportunity to object. The gentleman has had 
ample opportunity to give input.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Wisconsin 
[Mr. Obey] has expired.
  (By unanimous consent, Mr. Obey was allowed to proceed for 1 
additional minute.)
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I would simply note that with all due respect 
to what may happen on other committees, on our committee there has 
always been a tradition of due notice and due consultation before any 
such appointments have been made.
  I would also ask the gentleman if he can tell me any time in the past 
during which the Speaker has threatened to reduce the number of 
Democratic conferees on an appropriations conference below that of the 
ratio on the committee.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. LIVINGSTON. The gentleman well knows that this entire conference 
centers around a national security problem. The gentleman knows that 
because of the deployment of troops around the world in many forgotten 
spots of this wide globe of ours that the readiness, maintenance, 
operations, training hours, and many other importance areas have been 
depleted within the Pentagon, and we have had to come forward and try 
to replace those moneys so that the Pentagon, the Defense Department of 
this country, can carry out its mission without running short of money.

                              {time}  1400

  Now, it has been the point of view of the gentleman from Louisiana 
and the gentleman from Florida, the distinguished chairman of the 
subcommittee----
  Mr. OBEY. Reclaiming my time for just one second to correct something 
the gentleman said, the fact is the guts of this conference is not 
solely the provision of the authority that the gentleman is talking 
about. It is also the intent of the majority party to take domestic 
accounts to pay for Pentagon bills in a bill which is not even fully 
paid for and which adds to the deficit.
  Until we can get an understanding about not adding to the deficit, I 
am going to object.


                          ____________________