[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 61 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H4085-H4086]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1930
DEBATE ON TAX PLAN PROVISIONS
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kingston). Under a previous order of the
House, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hoke] is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the distinguished gentleman, since
it is on my time, would answer one question. Who was it that insisted
at the conference that this sweetheart deal for Murdoch be placed in
the conference report? Who was the individual that did that?
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Hoke, I am not part of the conference committee.
Mr. HOKE. Do you know the answer?
Mr. STUPAK. No, I do not.
Mr. HOKE. I know the answer. The answer is the junior Senator from
Illinois, the Democrat, Ms. Moseley-Braun. She is the one that insisted
on it. She is the one that asked it be put in the conference report.
Mr. STUPAK. If the gentleman will yield, I know you have read the
same articles I have on the $63 million deal from Mr. Murdoch. When
that question was put to the junior Senator from Illinois, what did she
say? What did she say? If I had my way, we would never repeal the
exemption for minority-owned stations, and that junior Senator is a
minority, because she thinks it is wrong. She opposed it.
Mr. HOKE. Reclaiming my time, that does not answer the question. The
question is who put it into the conference report? Clearly it was the
junior Senator from Illinois. And your attempt to somehow smear this
Speaker on this, when the Speaker had absolutely nothing, nothing
whatsoever to do with this, is such a blatant and ugly and clearly
politically, partisanly motivated ploy, I do not understand why you
make it, when it is so transparent, when it is pointed out that the
Speaker had nothing to do with it.
The Speaker was not involved with the conference. As I understand it,
this is something that was put in the conference report by the junior
Senator, a Democrat Senator, from Illinois, with respect to a specific
request that was made to her, not even by, as I understand it, Rupert
Murdoch, but by Quincy Jones. Have I got the facts wrong?
Mr. BONIOR. If the gentleman will yield, let me shed a little light
on this. You are indeed correct that this was put in the conference and
was put in at the behest of the Senator from Illinois to take care of a
deal that was pending. But what you are not correct on is that there
were 18 deals pending, and this was the only one that was accepted.
Now, you know as well as I do, my friend from Ohio, that in order for
something to come to this floor to be discussed, it has got to get the
Speaker's approval. The Speaker, I believe, admitted today in a
conference he had with reporters that he met with Congressman Archer,
the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, and they talked about
this very issue. And they agreed to let it come to the floor. Nobody in
this institution knew it was in the bill, except maybe a handful of
people. It got out of here on a voice vote after we opposed the bill
when it came to the House floor because of the billionaire exemption it
had in it, and nobody knew here. That is not the way to do business.
Mr. HOKE. Reclaiming my time, the fact is that the Speaker had
nothing to do with this piece of legislation in its minutiae and in the
detail you are speaking of with respect to a specific request that the
Democrat Senator from Illinois, Ms. Moseley-Braun, wished to have made
in order and insisted on at conference.
Those are the facts. Whether or not Mr. Archer and Mr. Gingrich
discussed the bill in general and in its terms is hardly the issue. The
issue is who insisted that this be put in at conference. Obviously it
was not Mr. Archer.
Mr. BONIOR. Who insisted it stay in this bill?
Mr. HOKE. This is my time. It was not Mr. Archer, it was not Mr.
Gingrich, it was Ms. Moseley-Braun. It
[[Page H4086]] was not something that our side wanted anything to do
with. It was special legislation for the junior Senator from Illinois.
Mr. Speaker, what I was going to ask was for people to put on their
green eye shade so that I could go through some of the details of
exactly how we are going to reduce the tax burden for senior citizens.
Unfortunately, I will not have time to do that.
What I will say is we are going to on Wednesday restore the $25
billion in cuts that were made in Social Security, cuts to senior
citizens by this Congress. Not a single Republican voted in favor of
those cuts in August of 1993, and we are going to restore those cuts so
that senior citizens are not deprived of their Social Security benefits
that were deprived to them by the Democrat Members of the House and of
the Senate.
____________________