[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 157 (Wednesday, October 11, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1925-E1926]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         REINVENTING GOVERNMENT

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, October 11, 1995

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert my Washington 
Report for Wednesday, October 11, 1995, into the Congressional Record.

                             Omnibus Bills

       Congress is completing work on an omnibus budget 
     reconciliation bill. Budget reconciliation bills balance 
     revenue and spending legislation to meet budget targets. This 
     one will be the thirteenth budget reconciliation bill since 
     the 1974 Congressional Budget Act, and by far the largest 
     single omnibus bill in history. It will include major changes 
     in Medicare, banking, farm programs, welfare, trade 
     negotiations, veterans assistance, student loans, 
     environmental preservation, small business support, and 
     hundreds of other important issues. Almost every key policy 
     change in this session of Congress will be in one single 
     bill.
       Omnibus bills are bills that contain numerous unrelated 
     provisions. The largest omnibus bills have been budget 
     reconciliation plans, which typically amount to less than $50 
     billion. This year, however, the congressional leadership is 
     planning an unprecedented $900 billion reconciliation plan. 
     Budget reconciliation bills are supposed to focus on changes 
     that impact the deficit, but this year's plan also includes a 
     large number of controversial policy decisions. Omnibus 
     budget bills are usually written behind closed doors in the 
     Speaker's office, and they are brought to the floor of the 
     House under closed rules that prohibit amendments and 
     severely limit debate. Thus, Members have only one up-or-down 
     vote on the entire legislative package.
       In theory, omnibus bills can be used to combine a few 
     complicated, intertwined issues for more efficient 
     consideration on the 

[[Page E 1926]]
     floor of Congress. The larger the bill, however, the less attention 
     Congress pays to critical issues. While the need for omnibus 
     bills can be legitimate under some circumstances, I have 
     expressed the concern for many years that abuse of this 
     process cheats Americans out of fair and effective 
     representation. Beginning with the work of the Joint 
     Committee on the Organization of Congress in 1993, I have 
     been working on steps to limit the scope of omnibus bills.


                               drawbacks

       There are several serious problems with omnibus bills. 
     First, citizen representation is diminished. Members get 
     only one vote on hundreds or thousands of different 
     issues. It is very difficult to address important 
     constituent concerns on these issues if a legislator has 
     only one vote on so many provisions. Second, Members 
     rarely have enough time to read--let alone study--large 
     omnibus bills. Members should have the opportunity to ask 
     questions, offer amendments, and debate the merits of 
     every critical issue facing our country. It is impossible 
     to foresee all the consequences of any given bill, and 
     open debate and public scrutiny invariably improve the 
     quality of legislation. Third, omnibus bills place a huge 
     amount of power in the hands of a few key leaders and 
     their staffs, which increases the influence of special 
     interests and the potential for corruption. Omnibus tax 
     bills, for example, are notorious for including numerous 
     tax loopholes for powerful interests with well-connected 
     lobbyists.


                                  why?

       It is not easy to explain why the Congress has become so 
     dependent on omnibus bills. In part, the volume of work and 
     the tendency to delay action to the last minute contribute to 
     the problem. In addition, Members of Congress do not want to 
     send bills with little political support to the floor as 
     separate bills. Because they avoid the normal committee 
     process, omnibus bills strengthen the power of congressional 
     leaders to shape a bill. The increased reliance on huge 
     omnibus bills reveals the marked deterioration in Congress' 
     consensus-making skills.
       The increasing reliance on omnibus bills suggests that 
     Congress is simply unable to deal in a fair and effective 
     manner with the variety, complexity, and sheer number of 
     issues that crowd the agenda. I have the uneasy feeling that 
     these omnibus bills show the Congress losing control of the 
     legislative process. All Americans believe major government 
     reforms are urgent, but Congress is unable to address them 
     deliberately and forthrightly. Members of Congress in both 
     parties complain that there has been a failure of the 
     institution to manage the budget process.
       I believe Congress' heavy reliance on omnibus bills is a 
     serious mistake. Congress should take immediate steps to 
     return to more open procedures.


                           possible solutions

       There are a number of steps Congress should take to 
     alleviate the problems of omnibus bills. First, Members 
     should be given time to review the bills. Although current 
     rules require a three-day waiting period for members to 
     review most bills, the congressional leadership rarely 
     observes these rules. These rules should be strengthened. 
     Second, Congress should enact an expanded line-item veto, 
     which would allow the President to break omnibus bills into 
     separate parts. I support a line-item veto. Earlier this 
     year, the House passed a limited version of the line-item 
     veto that would apply only to yearly spending bills--it would 
     not apply to omnibus budget bills. I voted for a line-item 
     veto that would be tougher on omnibus tax bills, but it was 
     defeated. Third, Congress should limit or prohibit 
     legislation that deals with many unrelated topics. Currently, 
     for example, the leadership could bring an omnibus bill 
     omnibus bill to the floor that funds a national park and a 
     nuclear submarine, and Members would have limited opportunity 
     to debate the merits of these distinct issues. Bills with 
     such different provisions should be restricted. Fourth, House 
     rules should be changed to allow Members to have a vote on 
     whether or not to divide huge omnibus bills into smaller 
     parts. Current rules allow the leadership to prevent such a 
     vote. I am working to change these rules to allow Members an 
     individual vote on major portions of a bill.


                               conclusion

       Omnibus bills have clearly gotten out of hand. It is simply 
     unacceptable to force Members of Congress to vote on 
     critically important bills that they have not had time to 
     review. It severely diminishes representative democracy when 
     Members are not permitted to vote on separate issues. Omnibus 
     bills can be acceptable when used for legitimate purposes in 
     a limited fashion, but the huge omnibus bills in recent years 
     are an abuse of the system that must be reformed.

                          ____________________