[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 14 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H1179-H1182]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE--PROTECTING THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE UNITED
STATES GOVERNMENT AND AVOIDING DEFAULT
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to rule IX, I rise to a question
of the privileges of the House and offer a resolution (H. Res. 356) to
protect the creditworthiness of the United States and avoid default of
the U.S. Government.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Barrett of Nebraska). The Clerk will
report the resolution.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 356
Whereas, the inability of the House to pass an adjustment
in the public debt limit unburdened by the unrelated
political agenda of either party, an adjustment to maintain
the creditworthiness of the United States and to avoid
disruption of interest rates and the financial markets brings
discredit upon the House;
Whereas, the failure of the House of Representatives to
adjust the federal debt limit
[[Page H1180]]
and keep the nation from default impairs the dignity of the House, the
integrity of its proceedings and the esteem the public holds
for the House; Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution the
enrolling clerk of the House of Representatives shall prepare
an engrossment of the bill, H.R. 2409. The vote by which this
resolution is adopted by the House shall be deemed to have
been a vote in favor of such bill upon final passage in the
House of Representatives. Upon engrossment of the bill, it
shall be deemed to have passed the House of Representatives
and been duly certified and examined; the engrossed copy
shall be signed by the Clerk and transmitted to the Senate
for further legislative action; and (upon final passage by
both Houses) the bill shall be signed by the presiding
officers of both Houses and presented to the President for
his signature (and otherwise treated for all purposes) in the
manner provided for bills generally.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Gephardt]
is recognized on the question of privilege.
Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, let me explain why this is a question of
privilege and why this Congress must act to extend the debt limit, with
no threats or conditions, to preserve the integrity of this entire
Government.
{time} 1630
Rule IX of this House states very clearly that matters of privilege
are those affecting the House collectively, those affecting its dignity
and integrity, and those affecting the reputation of Members in their
representative capacity.
I ask every Member of this Congress today, how can the dignity and
integrity of this Congress be maintained if we tear down the dignity
and integrity of this country? How can any single Member of the 104th
Congress maintain our reputation and honor if we go down in the history
books as the Congress that broke America's word, the very first
Congress that dared to tarnish America's trust in the world.
Mr. Speaker, I know there are enough Democrats and Republicans to
extend the debt limit and avoid this crisis right now, if we could only
have that vote on the floor. It is unfair to all of us to have our
rights, our reputations, our good names dashed for what I believe is a
partisan purpose.
Some of our Republican colleagues are threatening to default on
America's financial obligations, to turn our backs on seniors who need
their Social Security checks, taxpayers who deserve their refunds,
people throughout the world have invested in America.
There is no question that economic chaos would follow even a day of
default. Interest rates on credit cards, car loans, and mortgages would
skyrocket. The dollar would plummet. World financial markets could go
into a tailspin. The damage would most likely be permanent, because
such reckless delinquency would be without historical precedent in our
country.
We had a bloody Civil War in the last century, when America was torn
in half, probably our greatest crisis. But all through it and after it,
we kept our credit whole. During two world wars when our economy was
stretched to the limit, we found room to honor our word to the people
who had invested in our debt. Through recessions and a great
depression, we have guarded America's financial faith and integrity
because it is as sacred as the Constitution itself.
This is not partisan hyperbole. Even the threat of default is
damaging our credibility day by day, more and more with each passing
day.
We cannot afford to play politics with that credibility. We cannot
afford to delay to stand for our national word and honor.
What crisis is bigger than two world wars and the Great Depression? A
disagreement over a budget. We Democrats think it is wrong to cut
Medicare for huge tax breaks, especially since we think it is
unnecessary to balance the budget. Republicans legitimately disagree.
This is a valid debate. It is one we should resolve. But defaulting on
our obligations, hurting millions of average Americans, damaging our
most precious possession, our word and our credibility, is no way to
resolve it.
After all, shutting down the Government twice did not resolve it. Why
would an international economic crisis resolve it?
Mr. Speaker, parliamentary privilege exists for exactly this kind of
crisis. This is more than an economic issue. It is a profoundly moral
issue.
If we bargain away America's integrity for the latest political
squabble, if we can bring millions of families to the brink of economic
crisis because we cannot agree on this year's budget, then in my
opinion we cease to serve the United States of America, and we no
longer have honor to maintain.
This crisis, Mr. Speaker, is the very essence of privilege in this
parliamentary body, and I urge the Chair, on behalf of our country and
the promise and word of our country, to rule in its favor.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. (Mr. Barrett of Nebraska). Do any other
Members wish to be heard on the question of privilege?
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Yes, Mr. Speaker, I wish to be heard.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Massachusetts [Mr. Kennedy].
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, there can be no greater
cause for a parliamentary privilege than the constitutional crisis that
is being perpetrated by the elements of this House that have chosen a
path to default on America's debt in order to get their particular view
rammed through the House of Representatives and the Senate of the
United States. Mr. Speaker, we have got to deal with this crisis.
The truth of the matter is that originally we were told that the
reason why the Republicans so much wanted to have the debt default
issue brought forward was to insist upon a balanced budget. President
Clinton has agreed to a balanced budget.
We were then told, though, it was not a balanced budget, it was a
balanced budget within 7 years. President Clinton agreed to a balanced
budget within 7 years.
We were then told it was not a balanced budget within 7 years but it
was with the CBO numbers. President Clinton greed to a balanced budget
in 7 years using CBO numbers.
Then we were told it was not a balanced budget, 7 years, CBO numbers,
but it had to have a tax cut. President Clinton agreed to a tax cut.
It is not as big a tax cut as the one the Republicans want, so the
Republicans are insistent upon challenging the debt of this country,
breaking the back of 200 years of history, breaking the parliamentary
process that has been set up that says if we have disagreements between
bills passed by the House of Representatives and the United States
Senate, that we have in fact a President that can sign that bill or he
can veto that bill. If he vetoes the bill, we have the right to
override that veto. If we do not have the votes to override, we then
compromise.
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I demand regular order.
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. The truth of the matter is there is no
willingness to compromise.
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I demand regular order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman suspend. The Chair would
remind the gentleman to confine his remarks to the question of
privilege, please.
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I am talking about a
question of privilege. I am talking about my dignity and my integrity,
the integrity of this body, the integrity of every Member on the
Democratic and Republican side.
Mr. WALKER. Mr. Speaker, I demand the regular order.
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. You are willing to break the back,
break the debt of America in order to ram through your narrow political
guerrilla tactics. It is time for a little dignity on the floor of this
House, Mr. Speaker, and I want to be heard.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members must confine their remarks to the
question of privilege.
Mr. WALKER. I demand the regular order, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I believe very strongly
that this is an issue of parliamentary privilege. I could not agree
more strongly with the words of the gentleman from Missouri [Mr.
Gephardt], that this is an issue, the most important issue we have
faced this year, the most important issue that we have faced in many
years.
If we allow the debt of this country to be defaulted upon, we will
hurt the future of our country's borrowing, we will hurt the future of
our country's
[[Page H1181]]
children, and we will hurt our senior citizens.
Please pass a full debt extension. Allow us to pay our bills as every
generation prior to ours has done throughout the history of this
country.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New
York [Mr. Solomon].
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, in the interest of time, I will make the
argument brief as to why this resolution does not constitute a question
of privilege under House rule IX, but just as I do that, let me preface
those remarks by calling attention to the bill that will be on the
floor directly after we finish with these two issues here. It states in
the line 6, ``Congress intends to pass an increase in the public debt
limit before March 1, 1996,'' and let me say that they will do this
over my objections because I am just appalled that we are once again
going to extend this debt limit.
But having said that, let us talk about this issue. The precedents
are absolutely clear that a resolution raising a question of privilege
may not be used to change those rules. This resolution would change
House rules by automatically passing a specified bill. Nowhere in House
rules is it contemplated or specified that legislation may be called
up, let alone passed, by means of a question of privileged resolution.
The Chair has already so ruled on numerous occasions during the last
several weeks. I therefore would urge that this resolution be ruled out
of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentleman from Pennsylvania desire
to be heard on this question?
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise on the question of privilege.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania may proceed.
Mr. KANJORSKI. Mr. Speaker, I know that this is an issue that other
parliamentarians have ruled on in the history of this great House, but
as we reflect, my friends on both sides, and to remove this from a
partisan issue, the issue of the Constitution and the issue of the
House of Representatives predates the existence of either parties that
exercise influence in this House today.
We are in the 208th year of the American Constitution, the 104th
Congress of the United States. We are here by virtue of the fact that
our constituents elected us to come here and present ourselves under
article I of the Constitution of the United States and take an oath of
office that Constitution. Article I provides for the powers of the
House of Representatives, one of which is to provide for the debt of
the United States. Those of us in this House today, more than a
majority, I daresay, because I have a letter addressed to the Speaker
signed by more than 191 members of the minority side of the House, and
I am aware of the fact that several dozen of my good friends on the
majority side join me in this cause.
So clearly if a resolution for the raising of the debt limit
presented to the House clean, it could and would receive a majority
vote of the House of Representatives honoring the commitment we made in
our oath of office under article I of the Constitution of the United
States.
For the leadership of the House, for the Rules Committee or for the
rules of the House to frustrate article I and the individual oath and
the collective oath of this entire House and to argue that this does
not fall within the purview of the privilege of the House going to the
integrity and the dignity of individual Members or collectively of this
House is the most fallacious and ridiculous argument I have ever heard
in my years in public life.
I argue that we put aside today as we are about to leave on a 3-week
vacation and send a message to America that the House of
Representatives is going to pursue and follow its oath of office, the
article I of the American Constitution, and allow for an open vote a
resolution allowing for the provision to pay the debts of the U.S.
Government under the existing Constitution of the United States.
{time} 1645
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Barrett of Nebraska). Does the gentleman
from New York wish to be recognized?
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I would like to be recognized on the
question of privilege.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New
York on the question of privilege.
Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I am going to try desperately hard to be
nonpartisan in my remarks, because I think we have reached that point
as a Congress that the general public is just fed up with all of us and
are not taking the time to determine whether it is the so-called
Republican leadership or whether it is the House of Representatives,
the Senators or even whether it is the Government of the United States.
All of us have had the opportunity to explain what our job is here in
the House, and we are honored to serve in this House, and whether we
are dealing with adults or whether we deal with children, compromise
has never been a dirty word in explaining the work of the
subcommittees, the full committees, what we do in conference and what
we send to the President of the United States. If we are going to
change the rules here, you are changing the rules not just for
individuals and parties, you are changing the rules for every one of
the Members of this House whether they are participating in this or
whether they are not, and you are not giving them choices. You are not
playing by the rules. You are not playing by the rules we were sworn in
to endorse. Those rules are simple rules.
You do not like what the President has done. You do not like the
veto; you override the veto, that is what you do, and if you cannot
override the veto, you try to come back and work out something.
Oh, I know, you are in a hurry. You cannot talk about it. You cannot
talk about compromise. All of a sudden this beautiful word has now
become a stigma, because a handful of people have snatched what they
think is principle, and they are threatening the United States of
America's integrity throughout this world.
You can do what you want with your party or with your members. But it
is unfair, and it takes away from our prerogative as sworn Members of
this House to threaten the economic life of the United States of
America and the free world by holding a debt extension hostage in order
to reach your political end.
Politics are played at the polls, and they should not be the
reputation of the United States that is being played on parliamentary
maneuvers.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is prepared to rule on the
resolution offered by the distinguished minority leader.
The resolution offered by the gentleman from Missouri alleges that
the failure of the House to take a specified legislative action brings
it discredit and lowers it in public esteem. On that premise it
resolves that the House be considered to have passed a legislative
measure.
Under rule IX, questions of the privileges of the House are those
``affecting the rights of the House collectively, its safety, its
dignity, [or] the integrity of its proceedings.'' But a question of the
privileges of the House may not be invoked to effect a change in the
rules of the House or to prescribe a special order of business for the
House. This principle has been upheld on several occasions cited in
section 664 of the House Rules and Manual, including June 27, 1974
where a resolution directing the Committee on Rules to consider
reporting a special order was held not to present a question of
privilege.
In this Congress, resolutions have been offered that attempt to
advance legislative propositions as questions of privileges of the
House on February 7 and December 22, 1995, on January 3, 1996, and, in
particular, on January 24, 1996. The latter resolution similarly deemed
a legislative measure passed to redress previous inaction. When ruling
out that resolution as not constituting a question of privilege, the
Chair posited that permitting a question of the privileges of the House
under rule IX based on allegations of perceived discredit by
legislative action or inaction would permit any Member to advance
virtually any legislative proposal as a question of privileges of the
House.
Applying the precedents just cited, the Chair holds that the
resolution offered by the Gentleman from Missouri does not affect ``the
rights of the House collectively, its safety, dignity, [or] the
integrity of its proceedings'' within
[[Page H1182]]
the meaning of clause 1 of rule IX. Rather, it proposes to effect a
special order of business for the House--deeming it to have passed a
legislative measure--as an antidote for the alleged discredit of
previous inaction.
The resolution does not constitute a question of privilege under rule
IX.
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, I appeal the ruling of the Chair.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is, Shall the decision of the
Chair stand as the judgment of the House?
motion to table offered by mr. solomon
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I move to table the appeal of the ruling of
the Chair.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] to lay on the table the appeal of
the ruling of the Chair.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
recorded vote
Mr. VOLKMER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 229,
noes 187, not voting 17, as follows:
[Roll No. 26]
AYES--229
Allard
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baker (CA)
Baker (LA)
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bereuter
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bliley
Blute
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonilla
Bono
Brownback
Bryant (TN)
Bunn
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Chrysler
Clinger
Coble
Coburn
Collins (GA)
Combest
Cooley
Cox
Crane
Crapo
Cremeans
Cubin
Cunningham
Davis
Deal
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Doolittle
Dornan
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Ensign
Everett
Ewing
Fawell
Fields (TX)
Flanagan
Foley
Forbes
Fowler
Fox
Franks (CT)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frisa
Funderburk
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Greenwood
Gunderson
Gutknecht
Hancock
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Heineman
Herger
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Hoke
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jacobs
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kasich
Kelly
Kim
King
Kingston
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Laughlin
Lazio
Leach
Lewis (KY)
Lightfoot
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Longley
Lucas
Manzullo
Martini
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McKeon
Metcalf
Mica
Miller (FL)
Molinari
Moorhead
Morella
Myers
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Norwood
Nussle
Oxley
Parker
Paxon
Petri
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce
Quillen
Quinn
Ramstad
Regula
Riggs
Roberts
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roth
Roukema
Royce
Salmon
Sanford
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer
Schiff
Sensenbrenner
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Shuster
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stump
Talent
Tate
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Torkildsen
Upton
Vucanovich
Waldholtz
Walker
Walsh
Wamp
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Zeliff
Zimmer
NOES--187
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Andrews
Baesler
Baldacci
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Beilenson
Bentsen
Berman
Bevill
Bishop
Bonior
Borski
Boucher
Brewster
Browder
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Cardin
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coleman
Collins (IL)
Collins (MI)
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Danner
de la Garza
DeFazio
DeLauro
Dellums
Deutsch
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Durbin
Edwards
Engel
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Fazio
Fields (LA)
Flake
Foglietta
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Furse
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Geren
Gibbons
Gonzalez
Gordon
Gutierrez
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hefner
Hilliard
Hinchey
Holden
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson, E. B.
Johnston
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kleczka
Klink
LaFalce
Lantos
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lincoln
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy
McDermott
McHale
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Mfume
Miller (CA)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Montgomery
Moran
Murtha
Nadler
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Orton
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne (NJ)
Payne (VA)
Pelosi
Peterson (FL)
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Poshard
Rahall
Rangel
Reed
Richardson
Rivers
Roemer
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sawyer
Schroeder
Schumer
Scott
Serrano
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skelton
Slaughter
Spratt
Stark
Stenholm
Stokes
Studds
Stupak
Tanner
Tejeda
Thompson
Thornton
Thurman
Torres
Torricelli
Towns
Traficant
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Volkmer
Ward
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Williams
Wilson
Wise
Woolsey
Wyden
Wynn
Yates
NOT VOTING--17
Becerra
Bryant (TX)
Chapman
Filner
Green
Hayes
Johnson (SD)
Lewis (CA)
Manton
Meyers
Packard
Radanovich
Rose
Sanders
Seastrand
Smith (WA)
Stockman
{time} 1710
So the motion to lay on the table the appeal of the ruling of the
Chair was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________