[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 176 (Wednesday, November 8, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H11912]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2100
  HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 115 PLACES PARTISAN POLITICS ABOVE THE BEST 
                        INTERESTS OF THE NATION.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bilbray). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms. Jackson-Lee] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my concerns 
about House Joint Resolution 115, the continuing appropriations bill 
that passed the House of Representatives today. First we short change 
the process by having the resolution end on December 1, 1995, rather 
than December 13, 1995, which would allow time for reasoned solutions 
to this crisis.
  First of all, the House Rules Committee provided for a closed rule on 
this bill. Since this bill involves temporary funding for the Federal 
Government, it has a significant impact on all Americans. With this 
closed rule, Members were not allowed to offer any amendments to the 
important bill.
  Secondly, the bill includes many provisions that are inappropriate 
for a continuing appropriations bill. For example, one provision would 
place severe restrictions on political advocacy by certain groups. This 
provision would extend beyond prohibiting a recipient of a federal 
grant from spending any federal funds on political advocacy but would 
also limit the amount of privately raised funds that federal grantees 
could use for political advocacy.

  An organization receiving more than one-third of its funds from 
Federal grants could spend no more than $100,000 of privately raised 
funds on lobbying.
  Furthermore, this bill even prohibits grantees from using federal 
funds to purchase goods or services from other organizations that spent 
at least $25,000 on political advocacy.
  Federal grantees would also be required to report to the Federal 
Government on whether they engaged in political advocacy and describe 
the type of advocacy and list the amount of funds spent on such 
advocacy.
  These restrictions on political advocacy are un-democratic and un-
American. It is shameful that this House is trying every maneuver by 
attempting to attach these restrictions to any bill before the House so 
that such provisions can become law.
  The bill keeps the Medicare Part B premium in 1996 at 31.5 percent of 
costs instead of allowing the premium to automatically drop to 25 
percent, as it would occur under current law. Millions of Americans 
depend upon Medicare Part B for physician and out-patient services.
  This bill is also damaging because it contains a provision that would 
fund agencies scheduled to be eliminated in the 1996 appropriations 
bills at only 60 percent of their funding in fiscal year 1995.
  These agencies include: The Low-income Home Energy Assistance 
Program; Goals 2000 Education Program; Americorps National Service 
Program; Community Development Financial Institutions Initiative; 
Commerce Department's Advanced Technology Program; and National 
Biological Survey.
  These agencies are critically important to the quality of life for 
millions of Americans. This bill should have been more carefully 
considered by the House.
  Again, Mr. Speaker, I must express my concerns about the extraneous 
material that has no place in this bill. In the future, I hope that on 
critical legislation, such as this continuing appropriations bill, we 
will put the best interests of the Nation above partisan politics.

                          ____________________