[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 103 (Thursday, June 22, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H6205]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


VACATION OF ROLLCALL 405 AND MAKING IN ORDER DE NOVO VOTE ON AMENDMENT 
             OFFERED BY MR. FAZIO OF CALIFORNIA, AS AMENDED

  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the proceedings 
of the Committee of the Whole on rollcall No. 405 be vacated and that 
when the Committee of the Whole resumes consideration of H.R. 1854 
pursuant to House Resolution 169, the chairman of the Committee of the 
Whole be directed to put the question de novo on the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio] as amended by the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Houghton].
  The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Texas?
  Mr. GEPHARDT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, and I am 
reserving the right to object, but I will not object. I want to respond 
briefly to what the majority leader said.
  Mr. Speaker, I think what the majority leader is attempting to do is 
right. Our version of the facts is different than his, and I would like 
to give that version just for the purpose of all of us understanding 
what was involved here and so that we can try to not have these kinds 
of things happen again.
  As all of my colleagues know, the Speaker made a ruling early in the 
year that we would try to hold votes to 17 minutes. The ruling stated 
unless someone was in the well. Our version of the facts was that these 
two Members, who will speak for 5 minutes and will give their version 
of it in a moment, were in the Chamber, were trying very much to get 
into the well, but were not able to physically get there, but were, 
clearly understood by everybody in the Chamber, trying to vote, and in 
fact at some point, and there is a dispute about when they handed the 
card in or even handing cards in to vote, when the vote was called to 
an end, they were not allowed to vote. There is added suspicion because 
the vote was close and the majority was winning by one vote, and we had 
two Members coming into the Chamber, so there is added suspicion from 
that end of it.
  Mr. Speaker, there is very strong feeling on this side. I have been 
here now 19 years, and I have not in my experience seen the depth of 
feeling that occurred on this particular issue because, as the 
gentleman said, the thing that we all hold most dear is our ability to 
represent over 500,000 people in this Chamber on every issue that is 
voted on. These Members were doing their best to be here on time and to 
vote. I think there is added feeling on this side because we seem to be 
into a differing standard from vote to vote. As was said on the vote 
just before this vote, there was a long time that the clock was held 
open. On the vote after, on the motion to adjourn, it again was held 
open for a much longer time than 17 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, what I think we must do, and I hope we will be able to 
do, is to have a small group meet and try to figure out some standard 
that everyone can know so we do not wind up with either the reality or 
the perception of unfairness in how votes are conducted.
  There was another issue yesterday that has also been resolved that I 
need to bring to the attention of the Members, and that was a situation 
in the Committee on Science where a vote was held in the committee 
after the first bell had rung and maybe after the second bell had rung, 
and a lot of our Members left the committee thinking there would be no 
other votes in the committee. They came here to vote and missed a vote 
in the committee. The chairman of the committee rectified that this 
morning by having a revote in the committee so that people who had not 
voted in the committee could get the chance to vote, and on this issue, 
too, I think we need to have an understanding as to when votes will not 
be held in the committee after the bells have begun to ring at some 
point.
  The final thing I would say is that the most important thing we bring 
here is our ability to cast a vote. All of us love this House. All of 
us come here with a serious purpose of representing over 500,000 
people. We must never call into question, in perception or in reality, 
that we all are treated fairly in our ability to vote in committee and 
our ability to vote on this floor. This is the people's
 House, and, if there is ever a perception that we are not running this 
House in a fair manner, perception and reality, then we are in great 
difficulty.

  The minority will work in every way possible to make sure those 
standards are established and that they are lived with, and I believe 
that the right thing was done here today, and I hope and believe the 
right thing will continue to be done.
  I would like, as part of the request, to have the Members on our side 
have 5 minutes to explain their version of what went on.
  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I am about to make, as soon as this request 
is over, another request.
  Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER. Therefore, proceedings on rollcall No. 405 will be 
vacated, and, when the Committee of the Whole resumes consideration of 
H.R. 1854 pursuant to House Resolution 169, the Chairman of the 
Committee of the Whole will be directed to put the question de novo on 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from California [Mr. Fazio] as 
amended by the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Houghton].


                          ____________________