[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 65 (Friday, May 10, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H4822-H4836]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3230, NATIONAL DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 430 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 430
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this
resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule
XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of
the bill (H.R. 3230) to authorize appropriations for fiscal
year 1997 for military activities of the Department of
Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal
year 1997, and for other purposes. The first reading of the
bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against
consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be
confined to the bill and the amendments made in order by this
resolution and shall not exceed two hours equally divided and
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the
Committee on National Security. After general debate the bill
shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule.
Sec. 2. (a) It shall be in order to consider as an original
bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule
the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by
the Committee on National Security now printed in the bill.
The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall
be considered as read. All points of order against the
committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived.
(b) No amendment to the committee amendment in the nature
of a substitute shall be in order except the amendments
printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying
this resolution and amendments en bloc described in section 3
of this resolution.
(c) Except as specified in section 4 of this resolution,
each amendment printed in the report of the Committee on
Rules shall be considered only in the order printed in the
report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the
report, shall be considered as read, and shall not be subject
to a demand for division of the question in the House or in
the Committee of the Whole. Unless otherwise specified in the
report of the Committee on Rules, each amendment printed in
the report shall be debatable for ten minutes equally divided
and controlled by the proponent and an opponent and shall not
be subject to amendment (except that the chairman or ranking
minority member of the Committee on National Security each
may offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of further
debate on any pending amendment).
(d) All points of order against amendments printed in the
report of the Committee on Rules or amendments en bloc
described in section 3 of this resolution are waived.
(e) Consideration of the first two amendments in part A of
the report of the Committee on Rules shall begin with an
additional period of general debate, which shall be confined
to the subject of cooperative threat reduction with the
states of the former Soviet Union and shall not exceed forty
minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee on National
Security.
Sec. 3. It shall be in order at any time for the chairman
of the Committee on National Security or his designee to
offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in
part B of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying
this resolution not earlier disposed of or germane
modifications of any such amendment. Amendments en bloc
offered pursuant to this section shall be considered as read
(except that modifications shall be reported), shall be
debatable for twenty minutes equally divided and controlled
by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee
on National Security or their designees, shall not
[[Page H4823]]
be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand
for division of the question in the House or in the Committee
of the Whole. For the purpose of inclusion in such amendments
en bloc, an amendment printed in the form of a motion to
strike may be modified to the form of germane perfecting
amendment to the text originally proposed to the stricken.
The original proponent of an amendment included in such
amendments en bloc may insert a statement in the
Congressional Record immediately before the disposition of
the amendments en bloc.
Sec. 4. (a) The chairman of the Committee of the Whole may
postpone until a time during further consideration in the
Committee of the Whole a request for a recorded vote on any
amendment made in order by this resolution.
(b) The chairman of the Committee of the Whole may reduce
to not less than five minutes the time for voting by
electronic device on any postponed question that immediately
follows another vote by electronic device without intervening
business, provided that the time for voting by electronic
device on the first in any series of questions shall be not
less than fifteen minutes.
(c) The chairman of the Committee of the Whole may
recognize for consideration of any amendment made in order by
this resolution out of the order printed, but not sooner than
one hour after the chairman of the Committee on National
Security or a designee announces from the floor a request to
that effect.
Sec. 5. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for
amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the
House with such amendments as may have been adopted. Any
Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any
amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill
or to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute,
as modified. The previous question shall be considered as
ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage
without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with
or without instructions.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Burton of Indiana). The gentleman from
New York [Mr. Solomon] is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, for the purposes of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Frost],
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
(Mr. SOLOMON asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks and include extraneous material.)
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 430 is the traditional
structured rule that we grant for defense authorization bills.
The rule waives all points of order against the bill and against its
consideration. It provides for 2 hours of general debate equally
divided between the chairman and ranking minority member of the
National Security Committee. The committee's amendment in the nature of
a substitute now printed in the bill will be considered as base text
for the purpose of amendment, and all points of order are waived
against it.
The rule makes in order only those amendments printed in the report
of the Rules Committee to accompany this resolution, and waives all
points of order against those amendments.
The amendments made in order are not subject to amendment except for
pro forma amendments offered by the chairman or ranking minority member
of the National Security Committee.
They may also be amended if contained in part B of the report and are
offered as part of en bloc amendments offered by the chairman. Such en
bloc amendments are debatable for 20 minutes each equally divided
between the chairman and ranking minority member. The en bloc
amendments are not subject to further amendment. Any modifications in
the amendments printed in the report must be reported by the reading
clerk.
Mr. Speaker, of the 117 amendments submitted to the Rules Committee,
41 are made in order by this rule--21 by Republicans and 20 by
Democrats. The amendments are divided into two parts in the committee
report. The six part A amendments go to some major issue areas.
The first topic in part A are two amendments relating to the
cooperative threat reduction with the former Soviet Union, better known
as Nunn-Lugar. Those two amendments by myself and Chairman Gilman of
the International Relations Committee will be debatable for 10 minutes
each following 40 minutes of general debate on Nunn-Lugar.
The other amendments in part A include a DeLauro amendment on
abortion, debatable for 40 minutes; a Torkildsen amendment on HIV in
the military, debatable for 40 minutes; a Saxton amendment on the army
reserve, debatable for 30 minutes; and a Shays-Frank amendment on
burden sharing, debatable for 30 minutes.
Following those part A amendments, there are some 35 amendments made
in order, debatable for 10 minutes each, unless of course they are
included in en bloc amendments offered by Chairman Spence, in which
case debatable for 20 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, I won't go into the details of those additional
amendments. I commend to my colleagues the Rules Committee report on
this rule which includes a brief summary of each amendment in addition
to their complete text.
Let me simply say in concluding my remarks on this procedure that the
Rules Committee, as usual, had a difficult challenge in sorting through
over 100 amendments in just 1 day's time.
We appreciate the cooperation of Chairman Spence and his staff, Mr.
Dellums and his staff, and of course, our own ranking minority member,
Mr. Moakley and his staff along with Mr. Frost who in managing the rule
for the minority today. While we were obviously not able to please
everyone by our final decision in making in order roughly 40 percent of
the amendments submitted.
As I already indicated, even though there were more Republican
amendments submitted than Democrat amendments, of the 41 amendments
this rule makes in order, nearly half are by Democrats. So I think we
have achieved our goal of being as fair as we could be to all
concerned.
I therefore urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support
this rule so that we can get on with the important debate on this vital
piece of national security legislation.
On the bill itself, Mr. Speaker, I must say that congratulations are
in order to Chairman Spence, his staff and the rest of the National
Security Committee for having the foresight and the courage to report
out this excellent bill.
For the fourth year in a row, the Clinton administration has sent to
Congress a defense budget request that is simply inadequate to this
country's needs.
Particularly insulting was this year's weapon's procurement request
of only $39 billion, which is $21 billion short of where the Joint
Chiefs of Staff tell us that we need to be in just a few years.
I commend the committee for adding $7.5 billion to this account,
which has suffered a 70-percent real decline since 1985, leading to
today's severe modernization problems.
This increase, along with a quadrupling of the President's ammunition
request, will help fulfill one of the most sacred obligations the U.S.
Government has:
Ensuring that American soldiers and sailors have a plentiful supply
of the best weapons and equipment available so that they can adequately
defend themselves in battle.
Anything less than that is unforgivable.
Our military personnel are also well taken care of in this bill by a
3-percent pay increase and a 4.6-percent increase in the basic housing
allowance.
THE AMENDMENT PROCESS UNDER SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE,\1\ 103D CONGRESS V. 104TH CONGRESS
[As of May 9, 1996]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
103d Congress 104th Congress
Rule type ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of rules Percent of total Number of rules Percent of total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open/Modified-open \2\.............. 46 44 68 60
Modified Closed \3\................. 49 47 28 25
[[Page H4824]]
Closed \4\.......................... 9 9 17 15
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 104 100 113 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This table applies only to rules which provide for the original consideration of bills, joint resolutions or
budget resolutions and which provide for an amendment process. It does not apply to special rules which only
waive points of order against appropriations bills which are already privileged and are considered under an
open amendment process under House rules.
\2\ An open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule. A
modified open rule is one under which any Member may offer a germane amendment under the five-minute rule
subject only to an overall time limit on the amendment process and/or a requirement that the amendment be
preprinted in the Congressional Record.
\3\ A modified closed rule is one under which the Rules Committee limits the amendments that may be offered only
to those amendments designated in the special rule or the Rules Committee report to accompany it, or which
preclude amendments to a particular portion of a bill, even though the rest of the bill may be completely open
to amendment.
\4\ A closed rule is one under which no amendments may be offered (other than amendments recommended by the
committee in reporting the bill).
SPECIAL RULES REPORTED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE, 104TH CONGRESS
[As of May 9, 1996]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disposition of
H. Res. No. (Date rept.) Rule type Bill No. Subject rule
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. Res. 38 (1/18/95)........... O................ H.R. 5........... Unfunded Mandate A: 350-71 (1/19/
Reform. 95).
H. Res. 44 (1/24/95)........... MC............... H. Con. Res. 17.. Social Security....... A: 255-172 (1/25/
H.J. Res. 1...... Balanced Budget Amdt.. 95).
H. Res. 51 (1/31/95)........... O................ H.R. 101......... Land Transfer, Taos A: voice vote (2/
Pueblo Indians. 1/95).
H. Res. 52 (1/31/95)........... O................ H.R. 400......... Land Exchange, Arctic A: voice vote (2/
Nat'l. Park and 1/95).
Preserve.
H. Res. 53 (1/31/95)........... O................ H.R. 440......... Land Conveyance, Butte A: voice vote (2/
County, Calif. 1/95).
H. Res. 55 (2/1/95)............ O................ H.R. 2........... Line Item Veto........ A: voice vote (2/
2/95).
H. Res. 60 (2/6/95)............ O................ H.R. 665......... Victim Restitution.... A: voice vote (2/
7/95).
H. Res. 61 (2/6/95)............ O................ H.R. 666......... Exclusionary Rule A: voice vote (2/
Reform. 7/95).
H. Res. 63 (2/8/95)............ MO............... H.R. 667......... Violent Criminal A: voice vote (2/
Incarceration. 9/95).
H. Res. 69 (2/9/95)............ O................ H.R. 668......... Criminal Alien A: voice vote (2/
Deportation. 10/95).
H. Res. 79 (2/10/95)........... MO............... H.R. 728......... Law Enforcement Block A: voice vote (2/
Grants. 13/95).
H. Res. 83 (2/13/95)........... MO............... H.R. 7........... National Security PQ: 229-100; A:
Revitalization. 227-127 (2/15/
95).
H. Res. 88 (2/16/95)........... MC............... H.R. 831......... Health Insurance PQ: 230-191; A:
Deductibility. 229-188 (2/21/
95).
H. Res. 91 (2/21/95)........... O................ H.R. 830......... Paperwork Reduction A: voice vote (2/
Act. 22/95).
H. Res. 92 (2/21/95)........... MC............... H.R. 889......... Defense Supplemental.. A: 282-144 (2/22/
95).
H. Res. 93 (2/22/95)........... MO............... H.R. 450......... Regulatory Transition A: 252-175 (2/23/
Act. 95).
H. Res. 96 (2/24/95)........... MO............... H.R. 1022........ Risk Assessment....... A: 253-165 (2/27/
95).
H. Res. 100 (2/27/95).......... O................ H.R. 926......... Regulatory Reform and A: voice vote (2/
Relief Act. 28/95).
H. Res. 101 (2/28/95).......... MO............... H.R. 925......... Private Property A: 271-151 (3/2/
Protection Act. 95).
H. Res. 103 (3/3/95)........... MO............... H.R. 1058........ Securities Litigation .................
Reform.
H. Res. 104 (3/3/95)........... MO............... H.R. 988......... Attorney A: voice vote (3/
Accountability Act. 6/95).
H. Res. 105 (3/6/95)........... MO............... ................. ...................... A: 257-155 (3/7/
95).
H. Res. 108 (3/7/95)........... Debate........... H.R. 956......... Product Liability A: voice vote (3/
Reform. 8/95).
H. Res. 109 (3/8/95)........... MC............... ................. ...................... PQ: 234-191 A:
247-181 (3/9/
95).
H. Res. 115 (3/14/95).......... MO............... H.R. 1159........ Making Emergency Supp. A: 242-190 (3/15/
Approps. 95).
H. Res. 116 (3/15/95).......... MC............... H.J. Res. 73..... Term Limits Const. A: voice vote (3/
Amdt. 28/95).
H. Res. 117 (3/16/95).......... Debate........... H.R. 4........... Personal A: voice vote (3/
Responsibility Act of 21/95).
1995.
H. Res. 119 (3/21/95).......... MC............... ................. ...................... A: 217-211 (3/22/
95).
H. Res. 125 (4/3/95)........... O................ H.R. 1271........ Family Privacy A: 423-1 (4/4/
Protection Act. 95).
H. Res. 126 (4/3/95)........... O................ H.R. 660......... Older Persons Housing A: voice vote (4/
Act. 6/95).
H. Res. 128 (4/4/95)........... MC............... H.R. 1215........ Contract With America A: 228-204 (4/5/
Tax Relief Act of 95).
1995.
H. Res. 130 (4/5/95)........... MC............... H.R. 483......... Medicare Select A: 253-172 (4/6/
Expansion. 95).
H. Res. 136 (5/1/95)........... O................ H.R. 655......... Hydrogen Future Act of A: voice vote (5/
1995. 2/95).
H. Res. 139 (5/3/95)........... O................ H.R. 1361........ Coast Guard Auth. FY A: voice vote (5/
1996. 9/95).
H. Res. 140 (5/9/95)........... O................ H.R. 961......... Clean Water Amendments A: 414-4 (5/10/
95).
H. Res. 144 (5/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 535......... Fish Hatchery-- A: voice vote (5/
Arkansas. 15/95).
H. Res. 145 (5/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 584......... Fish Hatchery--Iowa... A: voice vote (5/
15/95).
H. Res. 146 (5/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 614......... Fish Hatchery-- A: voice vote (5/
Minnesota. 15/95).
H. Res. 149 (5/16/95).......... MC............... H. Con. Res. 67.. Budget Resolution FY PQ: 252-170 A:
1996. 255-168 (5/17/
95).
H. Res. 155 (5/22/95).......... MO............... H.R. 1561........ American Overseas A: 233-176 (5/23/
Interests Act. 95).
H. Res. 164 (6/8/95)........... MC............... H.R. 1530........ Nat. Defense Auth. FY PQ: 225-191 A:
1996. 233-183 (6/13/
95).
H. Res. 167 (6/15/95).......... O................ H.R. 1817........ MilCon Appropriations PQ: 223-180 A:
FY 1996. 245-155 (6/16/
95).
H. Res. 169 (6/19/95).......... MC............... H.R. 1854........ Leg. Branch Approps. PQ: 232-196 A:
FY 1996. 236-191 (6/20/
95).
H. Res. 170 (6/20/95).......... O................ H.R. 1868........ For. Ops. Approps. FY PQ: 221-178 A:
1996. 217-175 (6/22/
95).
H. Res. 171 (6/22/95).......... O................ H.R. 1905........ Energy & Water A: voice vote (7/
Approps. FY 1996. 12/95).
H. Res. 173 (6/27/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 79..... Flag Constitutional PQ: 258-170 A:
Amendment. 271-152 (6/28/
95).
H. Res. 176 (6/28/95).......... MC............... H.R. 1944........ Emer. Supp. Approps... PQ: 236-194 A:
234-192 (6/29/
95).
H. Res. 185 (7/11/95).......... O................ H.R. 1977........ Interior Approps. FY PQ: 235-193 D:
1996. 192-238 (7/12/
95).
H. Res. 187 (7/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1977........ Interior Approps. FY PQ: 230-194 A:
1996 #2. 229-195 (7/13/
95).
H. Res. 188 (7/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1976........ Agriculture Approps. PQ: 242-185 A:
FY 1996. voice vote (7/18/
95).
H. Res. 190 (7/17/95).......... O................ H.R. 2020........ Treasury/Postal PQ: 232-192 A:
Approps. FY 1996. voice vote (7/18/
95).
H. Res. 193 (7/19/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 96..... Disapproval of MFN to A: voice vote (7/
China. 20/95).
H. Res. 194 (7/19/95).......... O................ H.R. 2002........ Transportation PQ: 217-202 (7/21/
Approps. FY 1996. 95).
H. Res. 197 (7/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 70.......... Exports of Alaskan A: voice vote (7/
Crude Oil. 24/95).
H. Res. 198 (7/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 2076........ Commerce, State A: voice vote (7/
Approps. FY 1996. 25/95).
H. Res. 201 (7/25/95).......... O................ H.R. 2099........ VA/HUD Approps. FY A: 230-189 (7/25/
1996. 95).
H. Res. 204 (7/28/95).......... MC............... S. 21............ Terminating U.S. Arms A: voice vote (8/
Embargo on Bosnia. 1/95).
H. Res. 205 (7/28/95).......... O................ H.R. 2126........ Defense Approps. FY A: 409-1 (7/31/
1996. 95).
H. Res. 207 (8/1/95)........... MC............... H.R. 1555........ Communications Act of A: 255-156 (8/2/
1995. 95).
H. Res. 208 (8/1/95)........... O................ H.R. 2127........ Labor, HHS Approps. FY A: 323-104 (8/2/
1996. 95).
H. Res. 215 (9/7/95)........... O................ H.R. 1594........ Economically Targeted A: voice vote (9/
Investments. 12/95).
H. Res. 216 (9/7/95)........... MO............... H.R. 1655........ Intelligence A: voice vote (9/
Authorization FY 1996. 12/95).
H. Res. 218 (9/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1162........ Deficit Reduction A: voice vote (9/
Lockbox. 13/95).
H. Res. 219 (9/12/95).......... O................ H.R. 1670........ Federal Acquisition A: 414-0 (9/13/
Reform Act. 95).
H. Res. 222 (9/18/95).......... O................ H.R. 1617........ CAREERS Act........... A: 388-2 (9/19/
95).
H. Res. 224 (9/19/95).......... O................ H.R. 2274........ Natl. Highway System.. PQ: 241-173 A:
375-39-1 (9/20/
95).
H. Res. 225 (9/19/95).......... MC............... H.R. 927......... Cuban Liberty & Dem. A: 304-118 (9/20/
Solidarity. 95).
H. Res. 226 (9/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 743......... Team Act.............. A: 344-66-1 (9/27/
95).
H. Res. 227 (9/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 1170........ 3-Judge Court......... A: voice vote (9/
28/95).
H. Res. 228 (9/21/95).......... O................ H.R. 1601........ Internatl. Space A: voice vote (9/
Station. 27/95).
H. Res. 230 (9/27/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 108.... Continuing Resolution A: voice vote (9/
FY 1996. 28/95).
H. Res. 234 (9/29/95).......... O................ H.R. 2405........ Omnibus Science Auth.. A: voice vote (10/
11/95).
H. Res. 237 (10/17/95)......... MC............... H.R. 2259........ Disapprove Sentencing A: voice vote (10/
Guidelines. 18/95).
H. Res. 238 (10/18/95)......... MC............... H.R. 2425........ Medicare Preservation PQ: 231-194 A:
Act. 227-192 (10/19/
95).
H. Res. 239 (10/19/95)......... C................ H.R. 2492........ Leg. Branch Approps... PQ: 235-184 A:
voice vote (10/
31/95).
H. Res. 245 (10/25/95)......... MC............... H. Con. Res. 109. Social Security PQ: 228-191 A:
H.R. 2491........ Earnings Reform. 235-185 (10/26/
Seven-Year Balanced 95).
Budget.
H. Res. 251 (10/31/95)......... C................ H.R. 1833........ Partial Birth Abortion A: 237-190 (11/1/
Ban. 95).
H. Res. 252 (10/31/95)......... MO............... H.R. 2546........ D.C. Approps.......... A: 241-181 (11/1/
95).
H. Res. 257 (11/7/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 115.... Cont. Res. FY 1996.... A: 216-210 (11/8/
95).
H. Res. 258 (11/8/95).......... MC............... H.R. 2586........ Debt Limit............ A: 220-200 (11/10/
95).
H. Res. 259 (11/9/95).......... O................ H.R. 2539........ ICC Termination Act... A: voice vote (11/
14/95).
H. Res. 261 (11/9/95).......... C................ H.J. Res. 115.... Cont. Resolution...... A: 223-182 (11/10/
95).
H. Res. 262 (11/9/95).......... C................ H.R. 2586........ Increase Debt Limit... A: 220-185 (11/10/
95).
H. Res. 269 (11/15/95)......... O................ H.R. 2564........ Lobbying Reform....... A: voice vote (11/
16/95).
H. Res. 270 (11/15/95)......... C................ H.J. Res. 122.... Further Cont. A: 229-176 (11/15/
Resolution. 95).
H. Res. 273 (11/16/95)......... MC............... H.R. 2606........ Prohibition on Funds A: 239-181 (11/17/
for Bosnia. 95).
H. Res. 284 (11/29/95)......... O................ H.R. 1788........ Amtrak Reform......... A: voice vote (11/
30/95).
H. Res. 287 (11/30/95)......... O................ H.R. 1350........ Maritime Security Act. A: voice vote (12/
6/95).
[[Page H4825]]
H. Res. 293 (12/7/95).......... C................ H.R. 2621........ Protect Federal Trust PQ: 223-183 A:
Funds. 228-184 (12/14/
95).
H. Res. 303 (12/13/95)......... O................ H.R. 1745........ Utah Public Lands.....
H. Res. 309 (12/18/95)......... C................ H.Con. Res. 122.. Budget Res. W/ PQ: 230-188 A:
President. 229-189 (12/19/
95).
H. Res. 313 (12/19/95)......... O................ H.R. 558......... Texas Low-Level A: voice vote (12/
Radioactive. 20/95).
H. Res. 323 (12/21/95)......... C................ H.R. 2677........ Natl. Parks & Wildlife Tabled (2/28/96).
Refuge.
H. Res. 366 (2/27/96).......... MC............... H.R. 2854........ Farm Bill............. PQ: 228-182 A:
244-168 (2/28/
96).
H. Res. 368 (2/28/96).......... O................ H.R. 994......... Small Business Growth. .................
H. Res. 371 (3/6/96)........... C................ H.R. 3021........ Debt Limit Increase... A: voice vote (3/
7/96).
H. Res. 372 (3/6/96)........... MC............... H.R. 3019........ Cont. Approps. FY 1996 PQ: voice vote A:
235-175 (3/7/
96).
H. Res. 380 (3/12/96).......... MC............... H.R. 2703........ Effective Death A: 251-157 (3/13/
Penalty. 96).
H. Res. 384 (3/14/96).......... MC............... H.R. 2202........ Immigration........... PQ: 233-152 A:
voice vote (3/21/
96).
H. Res. 386 (3/20/96).......... C................ H.J. Res. 165.... Further Cont. Approps. PQ: 234-187 A:
237-183 (3/21/
96).
H. Res. 388 (3/20/96).......... C................ H.R. 125......... Gun Crime Enforcement. A: 244-166 (3/22/
96).
H. Res. 391 (3/27/96).......... C................ H.R. 3136........ Contract w/America PQ: 232-180 A:
Advancement. 232-177, (3/28/
96).
H. Res. 392 (3/27/96).......... MC............... H.R. 3103........ Health Coverage PQ: 229-186 A:
Affordability. Voice Vote (3/29/
96).
H. Res. 395 (3/29/96).......... MC............... H.J. Res. 159.... Tax Limitation Const. PQ: 232-168 A:
Amdmt.. 234-162 (4/15/
96).
H. Res. 396 (3/29/96).......... O................ H.R. 842......... Truth in Budgeting Act A: voice vote (4/
17/96).
H. Res. 409 (4/23/96).......... O................ H.R. 2715........ Paperwork Elimination A: voice vote (4/
Act. 24/96).
H. Res. 410 (4/23/96).......... O................ H.R. 1675........ Natl. Wildlife Refuge. A: voice vote (4/
24/96).
H. Res. 411 (4/23/96).......... O................ H.J. Res. 175.... Further Cont. Approps. A: voice vote (4/
FY 1996. 24/96).
H. Res. 418 (4/30/96).......... O................ H.R. 2641........ U.S. Marshals Service. PQ: 219-203 A:
voice vote (5/1/
96).
H. Res. 419 (4/30/96).......... O................ H.R. 2149........ Ocean Shipping Reform. A: 422-0 (5/1/
96).
H. Res. 421 (5/2/96)........... O................ H.R. 2974........ Crimes Against A: voice vote (5/
Children & Elderly. 7/96).
H. Res. 422 (5/2/96)........... O................ H.R. 3120........ Witness & Jury A: voice vote (5/
Tampering. 7/96).
H. Res. 426 (5/7/96)........... O................ H.R. 2406........ U.S. Housing Act of PQ: 218-208 A:
1996. voice vote (5/8/
96).
H. Res. 427 (5/7/96)........... O................ H.R. 3322........ Omnibus Civilian A: voice vote (5/
Science Auth. 9/96).
H. Res. 428 (5/7/96)........... MC............... H.R. 3286........ Adoption Promotion & A: voice vote (5/
Stability. 9/96).
H. Res. 430 (5/9/96)........... S................ H.R. 3230........ DoD Auth. FY 1997..... .................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Codes: O-open rule; MO-modified open rule; MC-modified closed rule; C-closed rule; A-adoption vote; D-defeated;
PQ-previous question vote. Source: Notices of Action Taken, Committee on Rules, 104th Congress.
Mr. SOLOMON. That is so important, Mr. Speaker, if we are going to
continue to depend on an all-voluntary military that will attract good
qualified young men and women from all across America, from all walks
of life.
This bill makes positive strides in other categories as well. The
Committee on National Security added $1.5 billion to the President's
request for research and development, including $860 million for
missile defense.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for this President to commit himself to
defending the American people against ballistic missiles. That is so
important. The time for talk is over. There are no more excuses for not
protecting ourselves. We know that there are literally dozens of
terrorist state governments out there, not to mention countries like
Iran and Iraq and Libya and North Korea and a number of others who at
any given time, because of the advances that they have made in their
military preparedness, could launch missiles right off the coast from
submarines.
This additional funding, Mr. Speaker, along with the Defend America
Act that we will consider next week, will help make missile defense a
reality in this country.
{time} 1230
Mr. Speaker, the long slide in defense spending must come to an end.
The end of the cold war did not mean that America no longer has any
interest in defending itself around the world. A robust military
posture is critical to safeguarding those interests.
Mr. Speaker, nor did the end of the cold war mean that the American
forces do not need the best equipment and weaponry that they can
possibly get. They do. And the end of the cold war certainly did not
mean that America is less vulnerable to missile attack, as I have just
alluded to. It is, and even more so than during the cold war.
Once again, the gentleman from South Carolina, Chairman Spence, and
the Committee on National Security deserves high praise for their work,
and I would urge support for this rule. Then when we take up the bill
on Tuesday and Wednesday, I would urge strong support for maintaining
the provisions that are in that bill. It is a good bill. I commend the
committee for bringing it to this floor.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I
thank the gentleman from New York for yielding the customary 30 minutes
of debate time to me.
I personally support House Resolution 430, the rule to H.R. 3230, the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997. However, there
is opposition to the rule because it does not allow for any amendments
that would provide for a reduction in defense spending.
Specifically, the Foley-Shays amendment would reduce the overall
authorization level of the bill to $264.7 billion, which is the same
level for fiscal year 1996 and a decrease of $2.3 billion from this
year's authorized level. Congresswoman Schroeder also offered an
amendment that would cut the overall level of defense spending by $13
billion. Both amendments were not made in order by the Committee on
Rules.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3230 reflects the country's continued effort to
revitalize America's defenses in order to meet the security
requirements of the post-cold-war world. The world has undergone
tremendous changes over the last few years. The Soviet Union is no
longer the dominant military threat it once was. However, we are still
seeing other trouble spots breaking out throughout the world. It is
therefore critical that we maintain a strong defense.
I commend the committee's fine job in bringing this bill to the floor
and its commitment to maintain the technological advantage enjoyed
today by U.S. military forces and to ensure that edge in the future.
Mr. Speaker, I believe this bill does just that.
The bill authorizes a total of $267 billion for DOD programs for
fiscal year 1997--$13 billion above the President's request. And $7.5
billion of this increase is slated for weapons procurement.
In particular, this bill authorizes funding for 10 C-17's for fiscal
year 1997, an airplane that is critical to our Nation's future airlift
capabilities. The bill also increases the administration's request and
authorizes $732 million for procurement of six V-22 Osprey--the
tiltroter aircraft that will provide medium lift capabilities for our
forces. In addition, the bill authorizes funding for six F-16 aircraft
in fiscal year 1997 and $2 billion on continued development of the F-22
stealth fighter. I also commend the committee for recommending an
increase of $290 million to the administration's request of $528
million, to accelerate the conventional conversion of the B-2.
Other programs which strengthen our national defense and ensure our
ability and readiness to respond forcefully to threats to our security
are also authorized in this bill.
Mr. Speaker, 109 amendments were filed on this bill. Forty-one were
made in order. While we would have wanted more to be made in order,
this is a good rule, Mr. Speaker, and I urge its adoption.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Sanibel, FL, Mr. Porter Goss, one of the most valuable
Members of this body, who serves on the Committee on Rules with me and
is a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and
probably has more understanding of this issue than most Members I know.
(Mr. GOSS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
[[Page H4826]]
Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Glens Falls, NY, the
distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee, for yielding me this
time. Mr. Speaker, providing for the national defense is one of the few
Federal duties outlined by our Constitution--it is our fundamental
responsibility to make sure that the Armed Forces have the resources
and training to protect this country from every military threat. And
despite the end of the cold war, we all understand there are still many
threats out there. It is a dangerous world. Just now the spreading
influence of Iran--an avowed enemy of the United States--in Europe and
other parts of the world is ringing alarm bells. Other obvious dangers
include: nuclear proliferation, heightened regional tensions and
uncertainty about the direction of powers like Russia and China. Mr.
Speaker, I share the concerns of many Americans about our
President's on again-off again commitment to key national security
issues. President Clinton seems content to lend his tacit approval to
Iran's expansion into Europe, while at the same time recommending
drastic reductions in defense resources. Even the liberal media is
commenting on this state of affairs. While I note that in some ways
this bill might be too comprehensive--in terms of the social issues
that would, I think, be better debated elsewhere--I commend the
National Security Committee for bringing forward a responsible bill in
a bipartisan manner. During the Rules Committee hearing on this
legislation, the spirit of cooperation and consensus that went into
crafting this bill was very evident.
Mr. Speaker, I think that we have worked in the same spirit to put
together the rule before us. After sifting through well over 100
amendments, we have a fair rule that makes in order a total of 42
Republican, Democrat, and bipartisan amendments on a wide range of
issues. And once again we have done so in a single rule, where past
Congresses have required multiple rules for this bill. I would urge
strong support for this rule.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Dellums], the ranking member of the committee.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, while oftentimes many of us take the well to discuss the
substantive nature of the bill before us in the context of the debate
on the rule, this is the rule. And for people who do not understand,
the rule is the process by which we determine how we deliberate,
discuss, and debate a significant piece of legislation.
Make no mistake about it, this is indeed a significant piece of
legislation. It is the next fiscal year's defense authorization bill to
the tune of $267 billion, not million, billion. That is an
extraordinary amount of money, Mr. Speaker, $267 billion.
This rule determines how we shall debate, what we shall debate. It
establishes the framework for the deliberation on this floor. And I am
constrained to challenge the process for the following reason: The
gentleman is correct, there are 6 quasi-substantive amendments, 35
remaining amendments, and I would like to say to my colleague had over
90 percent of these 35 amendments been introduced in committee, we
would have accepted them. They are not very substantive. They are
noncontroversial. For the most part they seek reports. They are
language amendments. They do very little. They do not really go to the
question of policy. Nor do they, Mr. Speaker, go to the issue of
dollars.
At a time when my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been
paralyzed the Government of the United States in order to put forward
the notion of a balanced budget, in the context of a post-cold-war
environment, this budget seeks to increase the President's military
request by $13 billion.
Now, I am a mature guy. I have walked up and down this Hill now for
almost 26 years, and I respect political difference. I understand
partisanship. I understand ideological differences. I understand policy
differences. I even understand fiscal differences. That is no problem.
That is why the American people elect Democrats and Republicans,
liberals, conservatives, and moderates.
But what I have great difficulty understanding and accepting is a
process that renders us impotent, and I underscore ``impotent,'' Mr.
Speaker, for the purposes of emphasis, in getting at the top line of
$267 billion.
I respect the fact there are Members in this body who seriously
believe we ought to spend $267 billion. No problem. Let us have debate.
But there are those of us who do not believe in the context of a post-
cold-war environment, in the framework of a balanced budget, limited
dollar environment, when we are punishing poor people, creating
significant problems as we reduce expenditures across the line, $13
additional billion in the military budget, when there is no longer a
Soviet Union, when there is no longer a Warsaw Pact, it seems to me is
right for us to debate. We ought to be able to accept each other's
differences and let the body decide.
For the rule precludes that, and there is something wrong. As I
looked at the proposed amendment, there was even a Republican amendment
that would have reduced this military budget to last year's level. That
would have been, Mr. Speaker, a $3 billion cut. If there were those
that wanted to reduce it, whack to the President's request, it would
have been roughly a $13 billion cut. So we should have had the
opportunity, somewhere between $3 billion and $13 billion, to have a
significant debate about whether or not we ought to spend this kind of
money in this atmosphere.
I would have to live with the results of that debate and how my
colleagues would decide to approach the issue. But to have no
opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to do so flies in the face of what we ought
to be about. It is, as I said before the Committee on Rules, our raison
d'etre. It is our responsibility, it is our reason for being, to debate
these issues.
We have been for the last nearly year and a half talking about
balanced budgets until we know each other's speeches by heart, but we
ought to have the opportunity.
Now, granted that we have equally divided the amendments between
Democrats and Republicans. I have no problem with that. The fact that
we have got 6 major amendments and 35 fairly noncontroversial
amendments, some problem. But I will even put that aside. But to have
no amendments on the top line, what it says, Mr. Speaker, is that
Members of Congress will have no opportunity to challenge the top line,
no other priorities. We in this rule will defend this turf. You have
disenfranchised 435 Members of Congress, who should have the
opportunity on any issue, to debate the substantive matters.
Now, Mr. Speaker, your response might be, well, maybe you ought to
debate the military budget top line in the context of the total budget.
But each Member of Congress was cautioned that when we debate later
this week the budget, if you wanted to submit a proposal, it had to be
in the nature of a substitute. Mr. Speaker, you understand what that
means. That means each Member has to file a total budget, not just
their concerns about a particular budget.
What I am suggesting to you is not one single Member of Congress will
have the opportunity to get at the top line of $267 billion, whether
they are Republican or Democrat, and there is something wrong about
that.
I do not mind staying here all night to debate. We have stayed here
all night to debate some matters that could have been debated in 1
hour, but we stayed, we drank coffee and we stayed all night. But when
we come to $267 billion, we want to drive this train at 100 miles an
hour.
That is why we are being paid, to discuss and debate. I think I have
demonstrated, Mr. Speaker, over the years I am willing to live with the
result, but give us our chance. There has not been a chance to do that.
For those reasons, I am constrained to oppose this rule, and I ask my
colleagues to aggressively oppose this rule. It flies in the face of
decency, democratic principles, and does not allow us to carry out our
fiduciary responsibilities to the American voter and the taxpayer.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume
just to respond briefly.
Mr. Speaker, I say to my very good friend, and I have such great
respect for him, I commended him the other day when he was chairman of
the committee, we all really looked up to him with great respect,
because he handled
[[Page H4827]]
himself so well in the committee. But let me just say in this rule, we
have made in order all of the important issues that were out there.
Many were missing from years past. They were not offered by the
Democrats or Republicans. We are dealing with Nunn-Lugar, which is in
my opinion a very, very bad program, where we have given the Russian
Government money to dismantle some of their missiles and they have
diverted it to God knows where. We need to get to the bottom of that.
We make those amendments in order.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield for one brief
question, I will not quarrel with that. I am simply saying the top
line. There were several amendments, Republican and Democrat. Can you
explain why we do not have the opportunity? How that could happen?
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I am about to do that.
I appreciate the gentleman's concern. We also deal with the very
controversial issue of abortion. We deal with the HIV issue. These are
all major issues where we are giving major portions of the time for
debate.
{time} 1245
We get involved with the Army reserve, with the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Saxton] sitting here. That is a very controversial issue.
We get involved with burden sharing. That is a very controversial issue
that I have worked with the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] and
the gentlewoman from Colorado [Mrs. Schroeder] on for years.
But getting back to the top line figure itself, there is nothing
worse than the way we have had handled this in the past where Members
are allowed to stand up here and offer an amendment to freeze defense
spending. What does that mean? Where are we then going to prioritize?
Or we are going to cut defense spending by 10 percent across the board?
What does that do to the priorities? Cut it by 5 percent, 2 percent. We
have had Members that want to offer amendments to cut it by 1 percent.
That is not the way to go about it.
There is something strange here because in years past, as the
gentleman knows, we have had numerous amendments to come in and cut
particular weapons programs. The gentleman has always offered
amendments to cut the B-2 program. Those amendments are nonexistent of
the 117 that were presented to us.
Now, what I am saying is that we have a budget resolution coming up
in which the Committee on the Budget has agreed to a figure of $267.3
billion. The budget that is here now recalls for $600 million less than
that.
In addition, the area to fight, where we are going to have the top
line, is either in the budget resolutions that are going to come before
this House the day after this bill is completed, or in the defense
appropriation bill, where we actually appropriate the money for all of
these programs. That is why we do not see amendments being allowed
today to cut across the board or to freeze defense spending.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SOLOMON. I yield to the gentleman from California briefly because
I am using up all our time.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. Quickly, if I hear
the gentleman correctly, then, he is suggesting that no amendments in
perpetuity will be allowed to cut any other budget other than the
military budget; housing, welfare, education, all these other programs.
We will not allow amendments to reduce those budgets either? Because if
that is the case, I can show the gentleman chapter and verse where
those kinds of amendments were allowed.
This is big money, 267. So are we setting a new precedent or
establishing a new policy? Because if we are, this is a major point of
departure.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would say to the
gentleman that, no; we are setting no precedent. The gentleman knows
that we have this bill on the floor next week. We have a missile
defense system bill on the floor, and then we have the budget bill
followed shortly by the appropriation bills.
We want to be able to deal with this all in that broad concept in
order to be able to maintain a decent military for the future of our
country.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Dellums].
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, if I heard my distinguished colleague
correctly, I would make two observations. First, this is a precedent
being set on the military budget that has not been set on any other
budget, and that is that we cannot make cuts; that we cannot offer
amendments to make cuts, and the rules will not do it. We know that is
not the case. We have made cuts in other programs. I will just let that
sit there for whatever that is worth.
The second point that I would make is that, if the issue is get this
bill up on Tuesday and get it out by Wednesday night, this is a triumph
of process over substance, and we ought to be about substance. We have
time to deliberate here, and I am not trying to demagog the issue. I am
willing to stay here all night like anyone else; but, when we are
talking about $267 billion, slow the train down and let us have a
deliberative and substantive discussion. Do not let process triumph
over substance.
If we are going to establish this precedent on the military budget,
then establish this precedent on programs that deal with our youth,
with our poor, with our aged, with our unemployed and other programs.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Hunter], a member of the committee.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time.
I want to respond just briefly to my friend from California. I
believe in having substantive debates, and we have had a ton of
substantive debates over the last many years. One thing that I have
noticed is generally not substantive, is when somebody comes to the
floor not with a programmatic cut, not saying the missile defense is
wrong or I want to cut the tank program or the helicopter program, but
just saying I think we can take $3 billion out of the defense budget
because it looks right and it feels good. And we end up with Members
rushing to the floor saying is this a good one? And we have literally
thousands of programs, and we have a $3 or $4 billion cut across the
board.
I agree with the gentleman that the Members should be allowed to
answer the tough questions. But I would say that generally the across-
the-board cuts are the least substantive debates that we have in this
House when they are not specific programs that those cuts are offered
in the context of.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HUNTER. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, I would respond to my colleague by saying
any committee could make that argument when they came to the floor.
Look, our product is a wonderful product. Do not make cuts in the
program. Why should we be protected like any other committee? Two
sixty-seven is a lot of money.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Oregon [Mr. DeFazio].
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time. The
debate thus far has been interesting.
I would just like to reflect on what the House has been doing the
last couple of days. We considered legislation regarding housing for
tens of millions of Americans across the country and the assistance
they might receive from the Federal Government. We spent over an hour
and a half debating the issue of pets. Pets in public housing. But
during the consideration of this bill there will not be 1 minute, there
will not be 1 second spent on the issue of whether or not the United
States of America should continue to acquire B-2 bombers, a weapon that
is worth more than its weight in gold. Every single ounce of that plane
is worth more than an ounce of gold.
Not 1 minute will be spent on whether or not we should acquire
additional B-2 bombers, a weapon system that even the Pentagon does not
want. But that could not happen here on the floor.
[[Page H4828]]
Now, the chairman will say, well, no one wanted to offer it. It was
not offered because we all knew it was a done deal. The books were
cooked and these kind of amendments were not going to be allowed. Why
not have an open rule? The famous open rule, where we would consider
any and all amendments offered by people legitimately elected.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DeFAZIO. I do not have time to yield to the gentleman.
Mr. SOLOMON. I will give the gentleman a minute if he will yield.
Mr. DeFAZIO. All right, Mr. Speaker, I will yield if the gentleman
does not use more than a minute.
Mr. SOLOMON. I thank the gentleman.
Under 40 years of Democrat rule there was never one open rule in the
defense bill and the gentleman knows that. But more than that, if the
gentleman himself or Mr. Dellums had filed a B-2 amendment, I would
have made it in order. Guaranteed. No amendment is there.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will open up the rule
again, I will bring one by.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is welcome to use the rest of
my time.
Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman and I appreciate that
there will not be an amendment on star wars. Here is a fantasy program
created by Ronald Reagan that has spent over $40 billion. The total
results are one phonied-up test over the Pacific Ocean, which the
Pentagon admits it phonied up. It did not actually work. They blew it
up with a detonator. And now we are going to go ahead with billions of
dollars more.
In fact, we are going to mandate deployment on an antimissile system.
Which one? None of them work. Well, we do not know, but within 7 years
we will deploy one for up to $40 billion or $50 billion. Probably it
will not work and it is not needed.
We have missile defense in this country. It worked against the
greatest threat to this country's freedom and security, the Soviet
Union, for 50 years. Mutually assured destruction. No Podunk third
World terrorist nation is going to launch a missile at the United
States of America that is identifiable because they know they would no
longer exist.
We do not need that kind of missile defense. We need defense against
terrorist weapons. But we will not have the discussion about star wars
here on the floor. That amendment will not be allowed.
We are not going to have a discussion about the fact that the
Department of Defense cannot account for $15 billion over the last 10
years. Now, if any other agency of government were missing $500,000, we
would have special committees and investigations.
Mr. Speaker, members should vote ``no'' on the rule.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey [Mr. Saxton], a very valuable member of the Armed Services
Committee, renamed the Committee on National Security.
Mr. SAXTON. Mr. Speaker, let me commend the chairman for reporting
what I think is a very fair rule. I cannot remember, Mr. Chairman, when
there were 41 amendments made in order, almost half of which were of
the minority party. I think that is quite commendable and I think it is
quite fair, maybe more fair than the gentleman should have been.
I would also like to remind the Members that have previously spoken
from the other side that it was just 25 years ago when our defense
budget amounted to about 33 or 34 percent of everything we spent
through the Federal Government. Then back in the middle 1980's we got
to around 30 percent, after having dipped down quite low. And today we
are spending about half as much in terms of the percentage of our total
expenditure on defense as we were even in 1986.
So this is not a robust spending bill. This is a very lean spending
bill. And I might say that some Members of the opposition party,
particularly the leadership of the opposition party down at the White
House, need to get realistic about where we are going with our defense
policy and try to match our defense spending with that policy.
We have been everywhere from Somalia and Haiti and Bosnia and the
straits of Taiwan, and we are worried about Korea. We have been to the
Middle East. And all of these on military excursions of one kind or
another all cost money, and moneys which are intended to keep our
servicemen and women in a safe condition. That is essentially what we
are looking to do with this rule, followed by the bill.
Early on our leadership said they would bring this bill to the House
in a timely fashion, and the gentleman from New York has helped
certainly to do that, and I commend him for it. We on the Armed
Services Committee looked at this bill and we decided that there were
some deficiencies because of the administration policy of using our
defense forces in a robust way in many parts of the world, and so we
added back some money that the President did not request.
For example, the Service Secretaries testified that they needed more
money for weapons modernization. It is in this bill. And $7.5 billion
was added to end the modernization holiday which is gutting our forces
and providing us with little option but to send our men and women
around the world with a lack of modern weapons, which they really need.
The Secretary of Defense asked for a quality of life program, and as
the chairman knows, it is in this bill: A 3-percent pay increase, a
4.6-percent hike in base allowance for quarters, and a provision to aid
single service members to live off post.
Many Defense officials cited the need for more family housing, and it
is in this bill. This is something that is extremely necessary for
quality of life. And so we are very pleased to bring forth this rule as
well as the provisions of the bill which will follow.
Once again, I commend the chairman and also thank him for making in
order the amendment which we will debate for 30 minutes.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South
Carolina [Mr. Spratt].
Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the rule.
I recall when we opened this Congress the colleagues on the other
side told us we were going to have open rules and free and open debate,
and this is a protestation, a rule that has been mostly honored in the
breach, and this rule is a classic example of it.
This bill adds $12.9 billion to the President's request, the
Pentagon's request for national defense. There was an amendment filed
that would strike the entire $12.9 billion. In all candor, I probably
would not have voted for it, but that is the overarching issue here.
At the very least we should open the debate with how much money we
are going to spend on national defense. If we do not want to debate
$12.9 billion, a huge add-on, at least we could have taken up the Foley
amendment offered by a gentleman from the other side of the aisle to
strike $2.6 billion and keep defense spending flat next year with the
level of spending this year. But that amendment, too was precluded by
this particular rule.
These two amendments, as I said, are the overarching issues. They
address what we are going to spend and what we are going to allocate to
defense. Deep within the interstices of this rule there are other
things that are precluded that I think are good government amendments.
I offered one. A simple amendment to strike $25 million in funding that
was added to the budget to accelerate the production of plutonium pits
that go into nuclear weapons.
{time} 1300
We have more plutonium pits than we can say grace over. If you want
to restart production, $25 million is a spit in the bucket compared to
what it is going to cost.
My amendment to knock out this entirely unnecessary $25 million was
not made in order. I am the ranking member of the R&D subcommittee on
our committee. There is a provision here that precludes the use of this
money for developing short takeoff and landing capabilities for the
Joint Strike Fighter, which means it precludes its use for the Marine
Corps. I know there has been some sort of compromise struck. Let us do
it on the floor, do it in the well, put it behind us, and let us have
that debate here and now.
What are we going to debate then? We are going to debate social
issue, totally peripheral to this bill, important
[[Page H4829]]
maybe, but not as important as how much we spend on national defense.
We are reopening gays in the military and HIV-positive serving, that is
what this debate will be focused upon, not the key issues of how best
to defend this country and how much to spend. That is why we should all
oppose this rule and start over again.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I am a little surprised at the attitude of
the gentlemen from South Carolina [Mr. Sratt].
The gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. Spratt] was a member of the
majority for many years here and never once put an open rule on this
defense bill on the floor. He knows that. This is more balanced, which
the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums] will agree, as far as the
distribution of amendments. Not only have we been fair, but to this
gentleman, Mr. Spratt, we have made two amendments that were very
critical to him in order. There were many Republicans that were turned
down; many Democrats that were turned down.
I think the gentleman should be a little more grateful for what we
did for him instead of standing up here and knocking a rule that makes
it that much more difficult for me to give him amendments in the future
that he asks for.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hoke],
perhaps another disgruntled Member who did not get his amendment made
in order, because we made 2 Spratt amendments in order and there was
not room for it, but nevertheless he is a very valuable Member of this
body. He has a good point to make here. I yield 3 minutes to gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. Hoke].
Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, I rise with some regret because the time has
been given to me so graciously by the gentleman from New York, who is
not only a great chairman but he is a great marine. But I still
nonetheless rise with no less resolve in opposition to this blatantly
unfair rule.
It is unfair because it does not permit the people's representatives
to hear a tragic and disturbing story that they deserve to hear. It is
the story of how defense contracts for military landing gear are being
sent abroad; how American working men and women are sweating blood to
send tax dollars to Washington so that we can send their jobs overseas;
how the percentage of foreign landing gear contracts has increased from
15 percent in 1992 to 76 percent in 1996. These are the U.S. contracts
for our landing gear. They have gone from 85 percent in 1992 down to 24
percent in 1996.
How the American landing gear industrial base has been decimated as a
result of that; how 77 United States cities had businesses with landing
gear defense contracts in 1992 and how that has dwindled to 38 cities
today, cities like Pomona, CA; Upland, CA; East Haven, CT; Sarasota and
Stuart, FL; Wichita, Kalamazoo, New York City, Cincinnati, Dallas, Salt
Lake City, Seattle, Oshkosh. How Americans actually are providing
foreign aid to some of those governments so that not only can their
citizens subsidize the stealing of American jobs but American citizens
can subsidize that, too.
Out of the $200 million that we spent just on Air Force landing gear,
not Army or Navy, in the past 7 years, nearly half has gone abroad.
Well, maybe now they have heard the story, but if we do not defeat
this terrible rule, the people's representatives will not have the
opportunity to stop this outrageous abuse of American tax money and
have the trust that they place in us. I do not care if you are a fair
trader or a free trader or something in between, but when we use
American workers; taxes to send jobs building our own military aircraft
overseas to be built by foreign governments, subsidized by their own
taxpayer dollars there, everyone knows that is wrong. We should not do
it. We should be voting on this amendment. Defeat this rule.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Massachusetts [Mr. Meehan].
Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise to state my opposition to this rule.
This is supposedly an opportunity for a candid debate on the merits of
the 1997 Department of Defense authorization bill. The Committee on
Rules is supposed to enable this debate.
My colleagues submitted 117 amendments to this bill. Although this is
a high number, it is actually lower than in previous years. Why?
Because it is difficult to draft amendments to a bill you have not
seen. And this bill became available to Members the day after
amendments were due. So by sheer will, 117 amendments were submitted.
However, we are going to debate only 41 of them.
The Committee on Rules has shut down 68 percent of the amendments
they received. Clearly the majority have carefully selected which
amendments they want to debate candidly. So, Mr. Speaker, I want to
talk about one issue that we will not be debating, because under this
rule we will not be debating the majority's addition of $12.9 billion
to the President's budget request for defense. We added $7 billion
above what the Pentagon asked for last year. Now in this year of
balancing the budget, we say to a government agency, the Pentagon, you
did not ask for enough money. We have found $13 billion that you should
have asked for, but we are going to give it to you.
Then we are going to bring it to the House of Representatives for a
debate, and there is not a Member who has an opportunity to question
whether or not we should be giving that agency more than they asked
for. Could you imagine any other budget that we deal with on the floor
of this House that we would say to a government agency, you did not ask
for enough money. We are going to give you more then we are not going
to debate it.
That is exactly what this rule does. The same people that want to
balance the budget, want to take 15 percent of the budget, increase it
by $13 billion and say when we have debate on the floor of the House,
we are not going to debate whether it is in the Nation's interest to
have added this money to the bill, not to mention the fact that we are
adding money for missile systems, and if you look at the Republican
budget over 7 years that you voted for, if you look at the increases in
the $13 billion, how are we going to maintain this equipment?
If you look at the outyears of the Republican budget, it is heavy on
the front end, but once you get into the sixth, seventh, eighth, later
years of that budget, it goes down. We have already added $20 billion
in 2 years beyond what the Pentagon asked for. No one in America really
believes that this is the way that you balance the budget. We should
defeat this rule. It is unfair and it does not give the American public
an opportunity to debate whether or not we ought to be giving $13
billion more than the Pentagon asked for.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume
just to respond to the former speaker.
It is too bad that the Clinton administration intimidates our Joint
Chiefs of Staff. A perfect example of that was that the Clinton
administration, which now is permeated with people that never served in
the military, there is nothing all wrong about that, but sometimes you
have a different way of thinking. I have, as a matter of fact, an
amendment that will be made in order and brought up on Tuesday to
investigate why we are not giving veterans priority consideration under
the laws of the land in the Clinton administration, not only in the
Defense Department but everywhere.
But the point is, there was a situation just recently where the
Clinton administration now wants to privatize all of the military
depots throughout the country. Sounded like a pretty good idea. Sounds
like Gerry Solomon, privatize. But that would have been a disaster in
case of emergencies to do that.
The Clinton administration forced the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all but
one, to sign a letter saying that they believed in privatizing. That is
exactly the same situation on the level of funding for the Defense
Department. The previous speaker knows that. That is why we have to
override the President and put in the money that we, the Congress of
the United States, think is necessary.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I would only caution my friend, the chairman on the other side, about
certain remarks. I would remind him that the Speaker of the House, Mr.
Gingrich, did not serve in the military. The
[[Page H4830]]
majority leader of the House, Mr. Armey, did not serve in the military.
The majority whip of the House, Mr. DeLay, did not serve in the
military.
I know the gentleman served in the military, as did I, but I would
urge the gentleman not to make remarks about the Clinton administration
and people who did not serve in the military when there are leaders on
his side of aisle who also did not serve in the military.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. FROST. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman knows that I was not
criticizing. I made it very clear that I was not. It is not a
prerequisite to have served in the military, but sometimes you do think
a little differently. But I have no criticism for any of those that you
mentioned, including the President, in spite of the differences about
how he did not serve, in my opinion. I have not criticized him in any
way about that.
Mr. FROST. Including the Speaker and the majority leader and the
majority whip who also did not serve.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas [Ms.
Jackson-Lee].
(Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman from Texas for
yielding the time.
I want to offer an insight into this debate that hopefully will be
accepted by the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules. The
defense is everyone's business. Defense is everyone's business. It is
the business of America. It is the business of this Congress. It is the
business of the President of the United States.
The authorization process which we are engaged in and reviewing a
rule for is a very important process. It sets the tone for the
Committee on the Budget and the Committee on Appropriations. I cannot
imagine why it is not appropriate for those of us who offered a simple
amendment to reduce the Defense Department's budget to the extent that
they wanted to have it. This budget is $13 billion more than they
requested.
I might add, having come from a family of those who have served in
the military, I do not find them intimidating easily. I might not
imagine that the Joint Chiefs would be intimidated by the fact that
someone elsewhere is pressuring them to do something. I offered a
simple amendment to reduce the defense budget by $6 billion. Fairly
that leaves $7 billion remaining in that budget over the amount
requested by the Defense Department.
I do not even dictate to the Defense Department how they should do
the reductions. I believe in readiness. I believe in military
personnel. I have been to Bosnia and Croatia and the former Yugoslavia,
Italy and Germany to look at our troops, others have been elsewhere.
I know the value of making sure that our military personnel are ready
and well and kept. I am glad that the chairman of the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs believes in, the Committee on Rules believes in
veterans preferences. I can assume that he believes in affirmative
action as well. None of that will be damaged, if you will, by a simple
opportunity to discuss a reduction in the defense budget. We, Mr.
Speaker, must do so.
I do agree, however, with the Harman amendment which respects the men
and women in the military that are HIV positive, respecting their
heroism, respecting their leadership and not denying them the
opportunity of being in the U.S. military.
Let us open the rule and allow debate on reducing this budget. I
think the Defense Department will be happy. The men and women in the
military will be happy, and we will do what is right for America.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to oppose the rule on H.R. 3230, the Defense
authorization bill. The amount of the authorized appropriations in the
bill exceed the amount requested by the Department of Defense by $13
billion. I offered an amendment in the Rules Committee that would have
reduced the total appropriations for the Department by $6 billion.
However, the Rules Committee did not accept my amendment.
I believe that the entire House of Representatives should have the
opportunity to determine whether this $13 billion increase over the
Defense Department's recommendation is prudent. Most Members have not
had the opportunity to review this bill in any depth. I am surprised
that many Members of this body who speak strongly in favor of a
balanced budget would not take the opportunity to allow a vote on an
amendment that would help us to reach the goal of deficit reduction.
Even if some Members believe that the Defense Department needs
significant increases in funding, my amendment would have still allowed
the Department to operate on $7 billion above the President's request.
The Department of Defense must contribute its fair share of the
sacrifice in achieving fiscal responsibility for our Government.
Programs such as Medicaid, Medicare, education, housing, and
environmental protection must not endure a disproportionate share of
the burden in balancing the budget.
I am sure that Members of Congress and the Department of Defense can
work cooperatively to find some reductions in the Department's budget.
For example, in the procurement area, you could carefully review the
number of C-17 planes, the number of DDG-51 destroyers, and the number
of strategic missiles. Additionally, in other areas, you could examine
whether some airborne missions or reserve divisions need to be merged
to save money. We need to have a real debate on these important issues
of the Department's priorities. The proposed rule for this bill does
not allow us to have this important discussion. I believe, however, in
any Defense reduction the Defense Department would make the correct
decisions.
There are a few positive amendments that were allowed by the Rules
Committee such as an amendment striking the provision stating that
military personnel who are HIV-positive would have to separate
themselves from active service. But such positive amendments don't
negate the need to discuss reductions to the Defense Department
authorization.
The rule for this bill is still too restrictive and I urge my
colleagues to reject this rule and allow amendments that would reduce
the overall level of authorized appropriations for the Department of
Defense.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Vermont [Mr. Sanders].
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, this is really an incredible rule. What we
have been hearing for the last year and what we will be hearing shortly
is that the leadership here in the Congress thinks that we should make
savage cuts in Medicare, force elderly people who do not have the money
to pay more for premiums. Meanwhile, they are suggesting that we spend
$13 billion more for the military than the President wants. Do not you
think the American people are entitled to that debate on priorities?
The Republican majority wants to savage Medicaid; 88 million people
will no longer have health insurance. Children will be without health
insurance. Elderly people will be unable to pay for their prescription
drugs.
{time} 1315
Mr. Speaker, I ask, ``Don't you think we should have a debate as to
whether or not we cut military spending, or we salvage Medicaid?''
I think the American people want that debate.
Maybe they will agree with our colleagues. Maybe they think we should
spend more money on star wars and B-2 bombers and less money on health
care; maybe our colleagues are right. I do not think they are. But I
think that is a debate that we should have.
Mr. Speaker, all over America, middle-class families are desperate.
In Vermont they are knocking their brains out trying to figure out how
they can afford to send their kids to college. Meanwhile the Republican
leadership is cutting back on loans and grants.
I think the American people, the middle class of this country, has a
right to decide whether we put more money into education or whether we
continue to spend a hundred billion dollars a year defending Europe and
Asia against a nonexistent enemy.
Mr. Speaker, some of the cuts that have been advocated here by the
Republican leadership are cruel, they are unnecessary. It seems to me
that before we go after nutrition programs for children, we take a hard
look at the military budget. We have a right to have that debate.
Defeat this rule.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I would advise the gentleman from New York
[Mr. Solomon] we only have one speaker remaining on our side who will
close for us. I do not know if the gentleman has any other speakers.
Mr. SOLOMON. I ask the gentleman, who is that speaker, sir?
[[Page H4831]]
Mr. FROST. The gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums].
Mr. SOLOMON. In that case, Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the
gentleman from California [Mr. Hunter]. I can think of no one better to
speak on behalf of this bill than this gentleman who is a very good
friend of the gentleman from California [Mr. Dellums]. He is a member
of the committee, been there a long time and has so much experience in
this field.
Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, first let me thank the gentleman from New
York [Mr. Solomon] for the great job that he has done as chairman of
the Committee on Rules because he puts together this rule not only with
an understanding of the parliamentary mechanics that go with that job,
but also as somebody who really understands national security, and I
want to thank him for that job and thank our full committee chairman,
the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] for the input that he
has.
Mr. Speaker, for my colleagues who maybe did not get an amendment
made in order, I did not get one of my amendments made in order, and I
offered a couple of them, and yet I support this rule, and let me tell
my colleagues why I do.
First, we did add to this year's defense request, but it was done
because the military wanted that additional money. In fact, we asked
the service Chiefs this year, and the genius of the gentleman from
South Carolina [Mr. Spence] this year was to bring in the service
Chiefs and ask them to tell us what they really wanted beyond President
Clinton's defense budget. They asked for $15 billion in added
modernization and equipment. They asked for $15 billion more. We gave
them about $7 billion more.
If we look at President Clinton's defense budget, his 5-year defense
plan in 1995, do my colleagues know what he asked for modernization
this year? Almost $50 billion. do my colleagues know what he asked for
when he actually got to the year-end question this year? Went down to
$38.9 billion, and after his own chiefs came in and said we need this,
then we acted and we gave them about half of what they requested, of
the additional add-on they requested, and the total bill, when we put
it together, was still about $4 billion less than President Clinton
said in 1995 we would need for this year.
So the first question is, Did the military want this? And the answer
is, ``Absolutely, yes.''
Second, do they need it? I think the best symbol of whether or not
they need it is a meeting that the gentleman from Missouri [Mr.
Skelton], the ranking member, and I had with the U.S. Marine Corps and
other service groups, specifically the ammunition experts when we asked
them, ``Can you fight two wars? If your infantry men have to fight the
2 MRC scenario, will they have enough bullets in their ammo pouches to
fight two wars?''
They said ``no.'' Marines are always candid. The marines said they do
not have enough ammo to fight two wars; they are 96 million M-16
bullets short. These ammo pouches, like the one I am holding here, will
be empty if our marines are caught up in that two-war scenario.
So, yes, we added ammunition for the marines, and they added a lot of
other ammunition in the marine account, too. Howitzers, tank
ammunition, and down the line, we put in everybody dime of ammo that
they needed, and one of the gentlemen who complained about the top line
was a Member who joined in letters asking for about $300 million in
add-ons. Now, that is not bad because I think that he too realizes that
this defense budget is coming apart at the seams.
The Clinton defense plan is coming apart at the seams. It results in
not enough ammunition for the troops, it results in not making the
safety upgrades for 24 Aviate Marine jumpjets, and the marine aviators
told us it would become 50 percent safer if they got those upgrades. It
is very expensive to do the upgrades, but we put the money in to do
that. So, yes.
The second question, Do they need it? Answer is, ``Absolutely, yes.''
In fact, according to the Clinton administration 2 years ago and the
service Chiefs themselves, they need more, they need more than the top
line we gave them.
Mr. Speaker, finally let me just say that the first obligation that
we have is to defend this country, and for those Members who have
talked about social needs and the need to balance this budget with
social needs, it is balanced with social needs, it meets the most basic
obligation; that is, to defend America.
This is an excellent bill, and the Committee on Rules has done a good
job in putting this rule to the floor, and, yes, we do not have the
first ever in history open rule on the defense bill, but the gentleman
from California [Mr. Dellums] and I have engaged in a couple of 5- and
6-week defense bills at one time, and we did enjoy that debate, and I
like to have as much time as possible, but I am also reminded that last
year we got behind the gun and we finished our defense bill after the
first of the year.
I like this rule. I think we are doing what the American people want.
Mr. Speaker, lastly let me make my last point to people that say
these add-ons were not requested by the service. They were special add-
ons that the members of Congress put in for pork in their district.
That was the cry last year. We did a calculation, and with respect to
the additional requirements that we met in this bill with the Army,
those requirements that we put in were 98 percent requested by the
service. With the Navy it was 86 percent requested by the service. With
the Marines it was 99 percent requested by the service. With the Air
Force it was 95 percent requested by the service. And I thank our full
committee chairman, the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Spence] for
making sure we put those numbers down this time and set the story
straight.
This is a good defense bill. Let us pass the rule and let us pass the
bill.
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute, and then I will
yield the remaining time to the gentleman from California [Mr.
Dellums].
Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of this Congress the Republican
majority claimed that the House was going to consider bills under an
open process. I would like to point out that 86 percent of the
legislation this session has been considered under a restrictive rule.
Not only are the Republicans restricting the process on the floor, they
are also restricting Members' input during the committee process. I
find it unfortunate that 48 percent of the legislation considered this
session has not been reported from committee. In fact, 13 out of 27
measures brought up this session have been unreported.
Mr. Speaker, I insert the following extraneous material in the
Record:
FLOOR PROCEDURE IN THE 104TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION; COMPILED BY THE RULES COMMITTEE DEMOCRATS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process used for floor Amendments in
Bill No. Title Resolution No. consideration order
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 1*........................ Compliance........ H. Res. 6 Closed................ None.
H. Res. 6...................... Opening Day Rules H. Res. 5 Closed; contained a None.
Package. closed rule on H.R. 1
within the closed
rule.
H.R. 5*........................ Unfunded Mandates. H. Res. 38 Restrictive; Motion N/A.
adopted over
Democratic objection
in the Committee of
the Whole to limit
debate on section 4;
Pre-printing gets
preference.
H.J. Res. 2*................... Balanced Budget... H. Res. 44 Restrictive; only 2R; 4D.
certain substitutes;
PQ.
H. Res. 43..................... Committee Hearings H. Res. 43 (OJ) Restrictive; N/A.
Scheduling. considered in House
no amendments.
H.R. 101....................... To transfer a H. Res. 51 Open.................. N/A.
parcel of land to
the Taos Pueblo
Indians of New
Mexico.
H.R. 400....................... To provide for the H. Res. 52 Open.................. N/A.
exchange of lands
within Gates of
the Arctic
National Park
Preserve.
H.R. 440....................... To provide for the H. Res. 53 Open.................. N/A.
conveyance of
lands to certain
individuals in
Butte County,
California.
H.R. 2*........................ Line Item Veto.... H. Res. 55 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
gets preference.
H.R. 665*...................... Victim Restitution H. Res. 61 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
Act of 1995. gets preference.
H.R. 666*...................... Exclusionary Rule H. Res. 60 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
Reform Act of gets preference.
1995.
H.R. 667*...................... Violent Criminal H. Res. 63 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Incarceration Act Time Cap on
of 1995. amendments.
[[Page H4832]]
H.R. 668*...................... The Criminal Alien H. Res. 69 Open; Pre-printing N/A.
Deportation gets preference;
Improvement Act. Contains self-
executing provision.
H.R. 728*...................... Local Government H. Res. 79 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Law Enforcement Time Cap on
Block Grants. amendments; Pre-
printing gets
preference.
H.R. 7*........................ National Security H. Res. 83 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Revitalization Time Cap on
Act. amendments; Pre-
printing gets
preference; PQ.
H.R. 729*...................... Death Penalty/ N/A Restrictive; brought N/A.
Habeas. up under UC with a 6
hr. time cap on
amendments.
S. 2........................... Senate Compliance. N/A Closed; Put on None.
Suspension Calendar
over Democratic
objection.
H.R. 831....................... To Permanently H. Res. 88 Restrictive; makes in 1D.
Extend the Health order only the
Insurance Gibbons amendment;
Deduction for the Waives all points of
Self-Employed. order; Contains self-
executing provision;
PQ.
H.R. 830*...................... The Paperwork H. Res. 91 Open.................. N/A.
Reduction Act.
H.R. 889....................... Emergency H. Res. 92 Restrictive; makes in 1D.
Supplemental/ order only the Obey
Rescinding substitute.
Certain Budget
Authority.
H.R. 450*...................... Regulatory H. Res. 93 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Moratorium. Time Cap on
amendments; Pre-
printing gets
preference.
H.R. 1022*..................... Risk Assessment... H. Res. 96 Restrictive; 10 hr. N/A.
Time Cap on
amendments.
H.R. 926*...................... Regulatory H. Res. 100 Open.................. N/A.
Flexibility.
H.R. 925*...................... Private Property H. Res. 101 Restrictive; 12 hr. 1D.
Protection Act. time cap on
amendments; Requires
Members to pre-print
their amendments in
the Record prior to
the bill's
consideration for
amendment, waives
germaneness and
budget act points of
order as well as
points of order
concerning
appropriating on a
legislative bill
against the committee
substitute used as
base text.
H.R. 1058*..................... Securities H. Res. 105 Restrictive; 8 hr. 1D.
Litigation Reform time cap on
Act. amendments; Pre-
printing gets
preference; Makes in
order the Wyden
amendment and waives
germaneness against
it.
H.R. 988*...................... The Attorney H. Res. 104 Restrictive; 7 hr. N/A.
Accountability time cap on
Act of 1995. amendments; Pre-
printing gets
preference.
H.R. 956*...................... Product Liability H. Res. 109 Restrictive; makes in 8D; 7R.
and Legal Reform order only 15 germane
Act. amendments and denies
64 germane amendments
from being
considered; PQ.
H.R. 1158...................... Making Emergency H. Res. 115 Restrictive; Combines N/A.
Supplemental emergency H.R. 1158 &
Appropriations nonemergency 1159 and
and Rescissions. strikes the abortion
provision; makes in
order only pre-
printed amendments
that include offsets
within the same
chapter (deeper cuts
in programs already
cut); waives points
of order against
three amendments;
waives cl 2 of rule
XXI against the bill,
cl 2, XXI and cl 7 of
rule XVI against the
substitute; waives cl
2(e) of rule XXI
against the
amendments in the
Record; 10 hr time
cap on amendments. 30
minutes debate on
each amendment.
H.J. Res. 73*.................. Term Limits....... H. Res. 116 Restrictive; Makes in 1D; 3R
order only 4
amendments considered
under a ``Queen of
the Hill'' procedure
and denies 21 germane
amendments from being
considered.
H.R. 4*........................ Welfare Reform.... H. Res. 119 Restrictive; Makes in 5D; 26R.
order only 31
perfecting amendments
and two substitutes;
Denies 130 germane
amendments from being
considered; The
substitutes are to be
considered under a
``Queen of the Hill''
procedure; All points
of order are waived
against the
amendments.
H.R. 1271*..................... Family Privacy Act H. Res. 125 Open.................. N/A.
H.R. 660*...................... Housing for Older H. Res. 126 Open.................. N/A.
Persons Act.
H.R. 1215*..................... The Contract With H. Res. 129 Restrictive; Self 1D.
America Tax Executes language
Relief Act of that makes tax cuts
1995. contingent on the
adoption of a
balanced budget plan
and strikes section
3006. Makes in order
only one substitute.
Waives all points of
order against the
bill, substitute made
in order as original
text and Gephardt
substitute.
H.R. 483....................... Medicare Select H. Res. 130 Restrictive; waives cl 1D.
Extension. 2(1)(6) of rule XI
against the bill;
makes H.R. 1391 in
order as original
text; makes in order
only the Dingell
substitute; allows
Commerce Committee to
file a report on the
bill at any time.
H.R. 655....................... Hydrogen Future H. Res. 136 Open.................. N/A.
Act.
H.R. 1361...................... Coast Guard H. Res. 139 Open; waives sections N/A.
Authorization. 302(f) and 308(a) of
the Congressional
Budget Act against
the bill's
consideration and the
committee substitute;
waives cl 5(a) of
rule XXI against the
committee substitute.
H.R. 961....................... Clean Water Act... H. Res. 140 Open; pre-printing N/A.
gets preference;
waives sections
302(f) and 602(b) of
the Budget Act
against the bill's
consideration; waives
cl 7 of rule XVI, cl
5(a) of rule XXI and
section 302(f) of the
Budget Act against
the committee
substitute. Makes in
order Shuster
substitute as first
order of business.
H.R. 535....................... Corning National H. Res. 144 Open.................. N/A.
Fish Hatchery
Conveyance Act.
H.R. 584....................... Conveyance of the H. Res. 145 Open.................. N/A.
Fairport National
Fish Hatchery to
the State of Iowa.
H.R. 614....................... Conveyance of the H. Res. 146 Open.................. N/A.
New London
National Fish
Hatchery
Production
Facility.
H. Con. Res. 67................ Budget Resolution. H. Res. 149 Restrictive; Makes in 3D; 1R.
order 4 substitutes
under regular order;
Gephardt, Neumann/
Solomon, Payne/Owens,
President's Budget if
printed in Record on
5/17/95; waives all
points of order
against substitutes
and concurrent
resolution; suspends
application of Rule
XLIX with respect to
the resolution; self-
executes Agriculture
language; PQ.
H.R. 1561...................... American Overseas H. Res. 155 Restrictive; Requires N/A.
Interests Act of amendments to be
1995. printed in the Record
prior to their
consideration; 10 hr.
time cap; waives cl
2(1)(6) of rule XI
against the bill's
consideration; Also
waives sections
302(f), 303(a),
308(a) and 402(a)
against the bill's
consideration and the
committee amendment
in order as original
text; waives cl 5(a)
of rule XXI against
the amendment;
amendment
consideration is
closed at 2:30 p.m.
on May 25, 1995. Self-
executes provision
which removes section
2210 from the bill.
This was done at the
request of the Budget
Committee.
H.R. 1530...................... National Defense H. Res. 164 Restrictive; Makes in 36R; 18D; 2
Authorization order only the Bipartisan.
Act; FY 1996. amendments printed in
the report; waives
all points of order
against the bill,
substitute and
amendments printed in
the report. Gives the
Chairman en bloc
authority. Self-
executes a provision
which strikes section
807 of the bill;
provides for an
additional 30 min. of
debate on Nunn-Lugar
section; Allows Mr.
Clinger to offer a
modification of his
amendment with the
concurrence of Ms.
Collins; PQ.
H.R. 1817...................... Military H. Res. 167 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Construction cl. 6 of rule XXI
Appropriations; against the bill; 1
FY 1996. hr. general debate;
Uses House passed
budget numbers as
threshold for
spending amounts
pending passage of
Budget; PQ.
H.R. 1854...................... Legislative Branch H. Res. 169 Restrictive; Makes in 5R; 4D; 2
Appropriations. order only 11 Bipartisan.
amendments; waives
sections 302(f) and
308(a) of the Budget
Act against the bill
and cl. 2 and cl. 6
of rule XXI against
the bill. All points
of order are waived
against the
amendments; PQ.
H.R. 1868...................... Foreign Operations H. Res. 170 Open; waives cl. 2, N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 5(b), and cl. 6
of rule XXI against
the bill; makes in
order the Gilman
amendments as first
order of business;
waives all points of
order against the
amendments; if
adopted they will be
considered as
original text; waives
cl. 2 of rule XXI
against the
amendments printed in
the report. Pre-
printing gets
priority (Hall)
(Menendez) (Goss)
(Smith, NJ); PQ.
H.R. 1905...................... Energy & Water H. Res. 171 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI
against the bill;
makes in order the
Shuster amendment as
the first order of
business; waives all
points of order
against the
amendment; if adopted
it will be considered
as original text. Pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.J. Res. 79................... Constitutional H. Res. 173 Closed; provides one N/A.
Amendment to hour of general
Permit Congress debate and one motion
and States to to recommit with or
Prohibit the without instructions;
Physical if there are
Desecration of instructions, the MO
the American Flag. is debatable for 1
hr; PQ.
H.R. 1944...................... Recissions Bill... H. Res. 175 Restrictive; Provides N/A.
for consideration of
the bill in the
House; Permits the
Chairman of the
Appropriations
Committee to offer
one amendment which
is unamendable;
waives all points of
order against the
amendment; PQ.
H.R. 1868 (2nd rule)........... Foreign Operations H. Res. 177 Restrictive; Provides N/A.
Appropriations. for further
consideration of the
bill; makes in order
only the four
amendments printed in
the rules report (20
min. each). Waives
all points of order
against the
amendments; Prohibits
intervening motions
in the Committee of
the Whole; Provides
for an automatic rise
and report following
the disposition of
the amendments; PQ.
H.R. 1977 *Rule Defeated*...... Interior H. Res. 185 Open; waives sections N/A.
Appropriations. 302(f) and 308(a) of
the Budget Act and cl
2 and cl 6 of rule
XXI; provides that
the bill be read by
title; waives all
points of order
against the Tauzin
amendment; self-
executes Budget
Committee amendment;
waives cl 2(e) of
rule XXI against
amendments to the
bill; Pre-printing
gets priority; PQ.
H.R. 1977...................... Interior H. Res. 187 Open; waives sections N/A.
Appropriations. 302(f), 306 and
308(a) of the Budget
Act; waives clauses 2
and 6 of rule XXI
against provisions in
the bill; waives all
points of order
against the Tauzin
amendment; provides
that the bill be read
by title; self-
executes Budget
Committee amendment
and makes NEA funding
subject to House
passed authorization;
waives cl 2(e) of
rule XXI against the
amendments to the
bill; Pre-printing
gets priority; PQ.
H.R. 1976...................... Agriculture H. Res. 188 Open; waives clauses 2 N/A.
Appropriations. and 6 of rule XXI
against provisions in
the bill; provides
that the bill be read
by title; Makes Skeen
amendment first order
of business, if
adopted the amendment
will be considered as
base text (10 min.);
Pre-printing gets
priority; PQ.
H.R. 1977 (3rd rule)........... Interior H. Res. 189 Restrictive; provides N/A.
Appropriations. for the further
consideration of the
bill; allows only
amendments pre-
printed before July
14th to be
considered; limits
motions to rise.
H.R. 2020...................... Treasury Postal H. Res. 190 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI
against provisions in
the bill; provides
the bill be read by
title; Pre-printing
gets priority; PQ.
[[Page H4833]]
H.J. Res. 96................... Disapproving MFN H. Res. 193 Restrictive; provides N/A.
for China. for consideration in
the House of H.R.
2058 (90 min.) And
H.J. Res. 96 (1 hr).
Waives certain
provisions of the
Trade Act.
H.R. 2002...................... Transportation H. Res. 194 Open; waives cl. 3 0f N/A.
Appropriations. rule XIII and section
401 (a) of the CBA
against consideration
of the bill; waives
cl. 6 and cl. 2 of
rule XXI against
provisions in the
bill; Makes in order
the Clinger/Solomon
amendment waives all
points of order
against the amendment
(Line Item Veto);
provides the bill be
read by title; Pre-
printing gets
priority; PQ. *RULE
AMENDED*.
H.R. 70........................ Exports of Alaskan H. Res. 197 Open; Makes in order N/A.
North Slope Oil. the Resources
Committee amendment
in the nature of a
substitute as
original text; Pre-
printing gets
priority; Provides a
Senate hook-up with
S. 395.
H.R. 2076...................... Commerce, Justice H. Res. 198 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI
against provisions in
the bill; Pre-
printing gets
priority; provides
the bill be read by
title..
H.R. 2099...................... VA/HUD H. Res. 201 Open; waives cl. 2 and N/A.
Appropriations. cl. 6 of rule XXI
against provisions in
the bill; Provides
that the amendment in
part 1 of the report
is the first
business, if adopted
it will be considered
as base text (30
min.); waives all
points of order
against the Klug and
Davis amendments; Pre-
printing gets
priority; Provides
that the bill be read
by title.
S. 21.......................... Termination of H. Res. 204 Restrictive; 3 hours ID.
U.S. Arms Embargo of general debate;
on Bosnia. Makes in order an
amendment to be
offered by the
Minority Leader or a
designee (1 hr); If
motion to recommit
has instructions it
can only be offered
by the Minority
Leader or a designee.
H.R. 2126...................... Defense H. Res. 205 Open; waives cl. N/A.
Appropriations. 2(l)(6) of rule XI
and section 306 of
the Congressional
Budget Act against
consideration of the
bill; waives cl. 2
and cl. 6 of rule XXI
against provisions in
the bill; self-
executes a strike of
sections 8021 and
8024 of the bill as
requested by the
Budget Committee; Pre-
printing gets
priority; Provides
the bill be read by
title.
H.R. 1555...................... Communications Act H. Res. 207 Restrictive; waives 2R/3D/3 Bi-
of 1995. sec. 302(f) of the partisan.
Budget Act against
consideration of the
bill; Makes in order
the Commerce
Committee amendment
as original text and
waives sec. 302(f) of
the Budget Act and
cl. 5(a) of rule XXI
against the
amendment; Makes in
order the Bliley
amendment (30 min.)
as the first order of
business, if adopted
it will be original
text; makes in order
only the amendments
printed in the report
and waives all points
of order against the
amendments; provides
a Senate hook-up with
S. 652.
H.R. 2127...................... Labor/HHS H. Res. 208 Open; Provides that N/A.
Appropriations the first order of
Act. business will be the
managers amendments
(10 min.), if adopted
they will be
considered as base
text; waives cl. 2
and cl. 6 of rule XXI
against provisions in
the bill; waives all
points of order
against certain
amendments printed in
the report; Pre-
printing gets
priority; Provides
the bill be read by
title; PQ.
H.R. 1594...................... Economically H. Res. 215 Open; 2 hr of gen. N/A.
Targeted debate. makes in
Investments. order the committee
substitute as
original text.
H.R. 1655...................... Intelligence H. Res. 216 Restrictive; waives N/A.
Authorization. sections 302(f),
308(a) and 401(b) of
the Budget Act. Makes
in order the
committee substitute
as modified by Govt.
Reform amend
(striking sec. 505)
and an amendment
striking title VII.
Cl 7 of rule XVI and
cl 5(a) of rule XXI
are waived against
the substitute.
Sections 302(f) and
401(b) of the CBA are
also waived against
the substitute.
Amendments must also
be pre-printed in the
Congressional record.
H.R. 1162...................... Deficit Reduction H. Res. 218 Open; waives cl 7 of N/A.
Lock Box. rule XVI against the
committee substitute
made in order as
original text; Pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.R. 1670...................... Federal H. Res. 219 Open; waives sections N/A.
Acquisition 302(f) and 308(a) of
Reform Act of the Budget Act
1995. against consideration
of the bill; bill
will be read by
title; waives cl 5(a)
of rule XXI and
section 302(f) of the
Budget Act against
the committee
substitute. Pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.R. 1617...................... To Consolidate and H. Res. 222 Open; waives sections N/A.
Reform Workforce 302(f) and 401(b) of
Development and the Budget Act
Literacy Programs against the
Act (CAREERS). substitute made in
order as original
text (H.R. 2332), cl.
5(a) of rule XXI is
also waived against
the substitute.
Provides for
consideration of the
managers amendment
(10 min.) If adopted,
it is considered as
base text.
H.R. 2274...................... National Highway H. Res. 224 Open; waives section N/A.
System 302(f) of the Budget
Designation Act Act against
of 1995. consideration of the
bill; Makes H.R. 2349
in order as original
text; waives section
302(f) of the Budget
Act against the
substitute as well as
cl. 5(a) of rule XXI
and cl. 1(q)(10) of
rule X against the
substitute; provides
for the consideration
of a managers
amendment (10 min).
If adopted, it is
considered as base
text; Pre-printing
gets priority; PQ.
H.R. 927....................... Cuban Liberty and H. Res. 225 Restrictive; waives cl 2R/2D
Democratic 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI
Solidarity Act of against consideration
1995. of the bill; makes in
order H.R. 2347 as
base text; waives cl
7 of rule XVI against
the substitute; Makes
Hamilton amendment
the first amendment
to be considered (1
hr). Makes in order
only amendments
printed in the report.
H.R. 743....................... The Teamwork for H. Res. 226 Open; waives cl N/A.
Employees and 2(l)(2)(b) of rule XI
managers Act of against consideration
1995. of the bill; makes in
order the committee
amendment as original
text; Pre-printing
get priority.
H.R. 1170...................... 3-Judge Court for H. Res. 227 Open; makes in order a N/A.
Certain committee amendment
Injunctions. as original text; Pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.R. 1601...................... International H. Res. 228 Open; makes in order a N/A.
Space Station committee amendment
Authorization Act as original text; pre-
of 1995. printing gets
priority.
H.J. Res. 108.................. Making Continuing H. Res. 230 Closed; Provides for ..............
Appropriations the immediate
for FY 1996. consideration of the
CR; one motion to
recommit which may
have instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or a designee.
H.R. 2405...................... Omnibus Civilian H. Res. 234 Open; self-executes a N/A.
Science provision striking
Authorization Act section 304(b)(3) of
of 1995. the bill (Commerce
Committee request);
Pre-printing gets
priority.
H.R. 2259...................... To Disapprove H. Res. 237 Restrictive; waives cl 1D
Certain 2(l)(2)(B) of rule XI
Sentencing against the bill's
Guideline consideration; makes
Amendments. in order the text of
the Senate bill S.
1254 as original
text; Makes in order
only a Conyers
substitute; provides
a senate hook-up
after adoption.
H.R. 2425...................... Medicare H. Res. 238 Restrictive; waives 1D
Preservation Act. all points of order
against the bill's
consideration; makes
in order the text of
H.R. 2485 as original
text; waives all
points of order
against H.R. 2485;
makes in order only
an amendment offered
by the Minority
Leader or a designee;
waives all points of
order against the
amendment; waives cl
5(c) of rule XXI (\3/
5\ requirement on
votes raising taxes);
PQ.
H.R. 2492...................... Legislative Branch H. Res. 239 Restrictive; provides N/A.
Appropriations for consideration of
Bill. the bill in the House.
H.R. 2491...................... 7 Year Balanced H. Res. 245 Restrictive; makes in 1D
H. Con. Res. 109............... Budget order H.R. 2517 as
Reconciliation original text; waives
Social Security all pints of order
Earnings Test against the bill;
Reform. Makes in order only
H.R. 2530 as an
amendment only if
offered by the
Minority Leader or a
designee; waives all
points of order
against the
amendment; waives cl
5(c) of rule XXI (\3/
5\ requirement on
votes raising taxes);
PQ.
H.R. 1833...................... Partial Birth H. Res. 251 Closed................ N/A.
Abortion Ban Act
of 1995.
H.R. 2546...................... D.C. H. Res. 252 Restrictive; waives N/A
Appropriations FY all points of order
1996. against the bill's
consideration; Makes
in order the Walsh
amendment as the
first order of
business (10 min.);
if adopted it is
considered as base
text; waives cl 2 and
6 of rule XXI against
the bill; makes in
order the Bonilla,
Gunderson and
Hostettler amendments
(30 min.); waives all
points of order
against the
amendments; debate on
any further
amendments is limited
to 30 min. each.
H.J. Res. 115.................. Further Continuing H. Res. 257 Closed; Provides for N/A
Appropriations the immediate
for FY 1996. consideration of the
CR; one motion to
recommit which may
have instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or a designee.
H.R. 2586...................... Temporary Increase H. Res. 258 Restrictive; Provides 5R
in the Statutory for the immediate
Debt Limit. consideration of the
CR; one motion to
recommit which may
have instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or a designee; self-
executes 4 amendments
in the rule; Solomon,
Medicare Coverage of
Certain Anti-Cancer
Drug Treatments,
Habeas Corpus Reform,
Chrysler (MI); makes
in order the Walker
amend (40 min.) on
regulatory reform.
H.R. 2539...................... ICC Termination... H. Res. 259 Open; waives section ..............
302(f) and section
308(a).
H.J. Res. 115.................. Further Continuing H. Res. 261 Closed; provides for N/A.
Appropriations the immediate
for FY 1996. consideration of a
motion by the
Majority Leader or
his designees to
dispose of the Senate
amendments (1hr).
H.R. 2586...................... Temporary Increase H. Res. 262 Closed; provides for N/A.
in the Statutory the immediate
Limit on the consideration of a
Public Debt. motion by the
Majority Leader or
his designees to
dispose of the Senate
amendments (1hr).
H. Res. 250.................... House Gift Rule H. Res. 268 Closed; provides for 2R
Reform. consideration of the
bill in the House; 30
min. of debate; makes
in order the Burton
amendment and the
Gingrich en bloc
amendment (30 min.
each); waives all
points of order
against the
amendments; Gingrich
is only in order if
Burton fails or is
not offered.
H.R. 2564...................... Lobbying H. Res. 269 Open; waives cl. N/A.
Disclosure Act of 2(l)(6) of rule XI
1995. against the bill's
consideration; waives
all points of order
against the Istook
and McIntosh
amendments.
H.R. 2606...................... Prohibition on H. Res. 273 Restrictive; waives N/A.
Funds for Bosnia all points of order
Deployment. against the bill's
consideration;
provides one motion
to amend if offered
by the Minority
Leader or designee (1
hr non-amendable);
motion to recommit
which may have
instructions only if
offered by Minority
Leader or his
designee; if Minority
Leader motion is not
offered debate time
will be extended by 1
hr.
H.R. 1788...................... Amtrak Reform and H. Res. 289 Open; waives all N/A.
Privatization Act points of order
of 1995. against the bill's
consideration; makes
in order the
Transportation
substitute modified
by the amend in the
report; Bill read by
title; waives all
points of order
against the
substitute; makes in
order a managers
amend as the first
order of business, if
adopted it is
considered base text
(10 min.); waives all
points of order
against the
amendment; Pre-
printing gets
priority.
[[Page H4834]]
H.R. 1350...................... Maritime Security H. Res. 287 Open; makes in order N/A.
Act of 1995. the committee
substitute as
original text; makes
in order a managers
amendment which if
adopted is considered
as original text (20
min.) unamendable;
pre-printing gets
priority.
H.R. 2621...................... To Protect Federal H. Res. 293 Closed; provides for N/A.
Trust Funds. the adoption of the
Ways & Means
amendment printed in
the report. 1 hr. of
general debate; PQ.
H.R. 1745...................... Utah Public Lands H. Res. 303 Open; waives cl N/A.
Management Act of 2(l)(6) of rule XI
1995. and sections 302(f)
and 311(a) of the
Budget Act against
the bill's
consideration. Makes
in order the
Resources substitute
as base text and
waives cl 7 of rule
XVI and sections
302(f) and 308(a) of
the Budget Act; makes
in order a managers'
amend as the first
order of business, if
adopted it is
considered base text
(10 min).
H. Res. 304.................... Providing for N/A Closed; makes in order 1D; 2R
Debate and three resolutions;
Consideration of H.R. 2770 (Dornan),
Three Measures H. Res. 302 (Buyer),
Relating to U.S. and H. Res. 306
Troop Deployments (Gephardt); 1 hour of
in Bosnia. debate on each.
H. Res. 309.................... Revised Budget H. Res. 309 Closed; provides 2 N/A.
Resolution. hours of general
debate in the House;
PQ.
H.R. 558....................... Texas Low-Level H. Res. 313 Open; pre-printing N/A.
Radioactive Waste gets priority.
Disposal Compact
Consent Act.
H.R. 2677...................... The National Parks H. Res. 323 Closed; consideration N/A.
and National in the House; self-
Wildlife Refuge executes Young
Systems Freedom amendment.
Act of 1995.
PROCEDURE IN THE 104TH CONGRESS 2D SESSION
H.R. 1643...................... To authorize the H. Res. 334 Closed; provides to N/A.
extension of take the bill from
nondiscriminatory the Speaker's table
treatment (MFN) with the Senate
to the products amendment, and
of Bulgaria. consider in the House
the motion printed in
the Rules Committee
report; 1 hr. of
general debate;
previous question is
considered as
ordered. ** NR; PQ.
H.J. Res. 134.................. Making continuing H. Res. 336 Closed; provides to N/A.
H. Con. Res. 131............... appropriations/ take from the
establishing Speaker's table H.J.
procedures making Res. 134 with the
the transmission Senate amendment and
of the continuing concur with the
resolution H.J. Senate amendment with
Res. 134. an amendment (H. Con.
Res. 131) which is
self-executed in the
rule. The rule
provides further that
the bill shall not be
sent back to the
Senate until the
Senate agrees to the
provisions of H. Con.
Res. 131. ** NR; PQ.
H.R. 1358...................... Conveyance of H. Res. 338 Closed; provides to N/A.
National Marine take the bill from
Fisheries Service the Speaker's table
Laboratory at with the Senate
Gloucester, amendment, and
Massachusetts. consider in the House
the motion printed in
the Rules Committee
report; 1 hr. of
general debate;
previous question is
considered as
ordered. ** NR; PQ.
H.R. 2924...................... Social Security H. Res. 355 Closed; ** NR; PQ..... N/A.
Guarantee Act.
H.R. 2854...................... The Agricultural H. Res. 366 Restrictive; waives 5D; 9R; 2
Market Transition all points of order Bipartisan.
Program. against the bill; 2
hrs of general
debate; makes in
order a committee
substitute as
original text and
waives all points of
order against the
substitute; makes in
order only the 16
amends printed in the
report and waives all
points of order
against the
amendments;
circumvents unfunded
mandates law;
Chairman has en bloc
authority for amends
in report (20 min.)
on each en bloc; PQ.
H.R. 994....................... Regulatory Sunset H. Res. 368 Open rule; makes in N/A.
& Review Act of order the Hyde
1995. substitute printed in
the Record as
original text; waives
cl 7 of rule XVI
against the
substitute; Pre-
printing gets
priority; vacates the
House action on S.
219 and provides to
take the bill from
the Speaker's table
and consider the
Senate bill; allows
Chrmn. Clinger a
motion to strike all
after the enacting
clause of the Senate
bill and insert the
text of H.R. 994 as
passed by the House
(1 hr) debate; waives
germaneness against
the motion; provides
if the motion is
adopted that it is in
order for the House
to insist on its
amendments and
request a conference.
H.R. 3021...................... To Guarantee the H. Res. 371 Closed rule; gives one N/A.
Continuing Full motion to recommit,
Investment of which if it contains
Social security instructions, may
and Other Federal only if offered by
Funds in the Minority Leader
Obligations of or his designee. **
the United States. NR.
H.R. 3019...................... A Further H. Res. 372 Restrictive; self- 2D/2R.
Downpayment executes CBO language
Toward a Balanced regarding contingency
Budget. funds in section 2 of
the rule; makes in
order only the
amendments printed in
the report; Lowey (20
min), Istook (20
min), Crapo (20 min),
Obey (1 hr); waives
all points of order
against the
amendments; give one
motion to recommit,
which if contains
instructions, may
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or his designee. **
NR.
H.R. 2703...................... The Effective H. Res. 380 Restrictive; makes in 6D; 7R; 4
Death Penalty and order only the Bipartisan.
Public Safety Act amendments printed in
of 1996. the report; waives
all points of order
against the
amendments; gives
Judiciary Chairman en
bloc authority (20
min.) on en blocs;
provides a Senate
hook-up with S. 735.
** NR.
H.R. 2202...................... The Immigration H. Res. 384 Restrictive; waives 12D; 19R; 1
and National all points of order Bipartisan.
Interest Act of against the bill and
1995. amendments in the
report except for
those arising under
sec. 425(a) of the
Budget Act (unfunded
mandates); 2 hrs. of
general debate on the
bill; makes in order
the committee
substitute as base
text; makes in order
only the amends in
the report; gives the
Judiciary Chairman en
bloc authority (20
min.) of debate on
the en blocs; self-
executes the Smith
(TX) amendment re:
employee verification
program; PQ.
H.J. Res. 165.................. Making further H. Res. 386 Closed; provides for N/A.
continuing the consideration of
appropriations the CR in the House
for FY 1996. and gives one motion
to recommit which may
contain instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader;
the rule also waives
cl 4(b) of rule XI
against the
following: an omnibus
appropriations bill,
another CR, a bill
extending the debt
limit. ** NR.
H.R. 125....................... The Gun Crime H. Res. 388 Closed; self-executes N/A
Enforcement and an amendment;
Second Amendment provides one motion
Restoration Act to recommit which may
of 1996. contain instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or his designee. **
NR.
H.R. 3136...................... The Contract With H. Res. 391 Closed; provides for N/A
America the consideration of
Advancement Act the bill in the
of 1996. House; self-executes
an amendment in the
Rules report; waives
all points of order,
except sec. 425(a)
(unfunded mandates)
of the CBA, against
the bill's
consideration; orders
the PQ except 1 hr.
of general debate
between the Chairman
and Ranking Member of
Ways and Means; one
Archer amendment (10
min.); one motion to
recommit which may
contain instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or his designee;
Provides a Senate
hookup if the Senate
passes S. 4 by March
30, 1996. **NR.
H.R. 3103...................... The Health H. Res. 392 Restrictive: 2 hrs. of N/A
Coverage general debate (45
Availability and min. split by Ways
Affordability Act and Means) (45 split
of 1996. by Commerce) (30
split by Economic and
Educational
Opportunities); self-
executes H.R. 3160 as
modified by the
amendment in the
Rules report as
original text; waives
all points of order,
except sec. 425(a)
(unfunded mandates)
of the CBA; makes in
order a Democratic
substitute (1 hr.)
waives all points of
order, except sec.
425(a) (unfunded
mandates) of the CBA,
against the
amendment; one motion
to recommit which may
contain instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or his designee;
waives cl 5(c) of
Rule XXI (requiring
\3/5\ vote on any tax
increase) on votes on
the bill, amendments
or conference reports.
H.J. Res. 159.................. Tax Limitation H. Res. 395 Restrictive; provides 1D
Constitutional for consideration of
Amendment. the bill in the
House; 3 hrs of
general debate; Makes
in order H.J. Res.
169 as original text;
allows for an
amendment to be
offered by the
Minority Leader or
his designee (1 hr)
** NR; PQ.
H.R. 842....................... Truth in Budgeting H. Res. 396 Open; 2 hrs. of N/A
Act. general debate; Pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.R. 2715...................... Paperwork H. Res. 409 Open; Preprinting get N/A
Elimination Act priority.
of 1996.
H.R. 1675...................... National Wildlife H. Res. 410 Open; Makes the Young N/A
Refuge amendment printed in
Improvement Act the 4/16/96 Record in
of 1995. order as original
text; waives cl 7 of
rule XVI against the
amendment;
Preprinting gets
priority; **NR.
H.J. Res. 175.................. Further Continuing H. Res. 411 Closed; provides for N/A
Appropriations consideration of the
for FY 1996. bill in the House;
one motion to
recommit which, if
containing
instructions, may be
offered by the
Minority Leader or
his designee. **NR.
H.R. 2641...................... United States H. Res. 418 Open; Pre-printing N/A
Marshals Service gets priority; Senate
Improvement Act hook-up. **PQ.
of 1996.
H.R. 2149...................... The Ocean Shipping H. Res. 419 Open; Makes in order a N/A
Reform Act. managers amendment as
the first order of
business (10 min.);
if adopted it is
considered as base
text; waives cl 7 of
rule XVI against the
managers amendment;
Pre-printing gets
priority; makes in
order an Obestar en
bloc amendment.
H.R. 2974...................... To amend the H. Res. 421 Open; waives cl 7 of N/A
Violent Crime rule XIII against
Control and Law consideration of the
Enforcement Act bill; makes in order
of 1994 to the Judiciary
provide enhanced substitute printed in
penalties for the bill as original
crimes against text; waives cl 7 of
elderly and child rule XVI against the
victims. substitute; Pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.R. 3120...................... To amend Title 18, H. Res. 422 Open; waives cl 7 of N/A
United States rule XIII against
Code, with consideration of the
respect to bill; makes in order
witness the Judiciary
retaliation, substitute printed in
witness tampering the bill as original
and jury text; waives cl 7 of
tampering. rule XVI against the
substitute; Pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.R. 2406...................... The United States H. Res. 426 Open; makes in order N/A
Housing Act of the committee
1996. substitute printed in
the bill as original
text; waives cl 5(a)
of rule XXI against
the substitute; makes
in order a managers
amendment as the
first order of
business (10 min); if
adopted it is
considered as base
text; Pre-printing
gets priority;
provides a Senate
hook-up.
H.R. 3322...................... Omnibus Civilian H. Res. 427 Open; waives cl N/A
Science 2(l)(2) of rule XI
Authorization Act against the bill's
of 1996. consideration; makes
in order a managers
amendment as the
first order of
business (10 min); if
adopted it is
considered as base
text; waives cl 5(a)
of rule XXI against
the bill; pre-
printing gets
priority.
H.R. 3286...................... The Adoption H. Res. 428 Restrictive; provides 1D; 1R
Promotion and consideration of the
Stability Act of bill in the House;
1996. makes in order the
Ways & Means
substitute printed in
the bill as original
text; makes in order
a Gibbons amendment
to title II (30 min)
and a Young amendment
(30 min); provides
one motion to
recommit which may
contain instructions
only if offered by
the Minority Leader
or his designee.
[[Page H4835]]
H.R. 3230...................... Defense H. Res. 430 Restrictive........... 41 amends;
Authorization 20D; 17R; 4
Bill FY 1997. bipartisan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Contract Bills, 67% restrictive; 33% open. ** All legislation 1st Session, 53% restrictive; 47% open. *** All
legislation 2d Session, 87% restrictive; 13% open. **** All legislation 104th Congress, 58% restrictive; 42%
open. ***** NR indicates that the legislation being considered by the House for amendment has circumvented
standard procedure and was never reported from any House committee. ****** PQ Indicates that previous question
was ordered on the resolution. ******* Restrictive rules are those which limit the number of amendments which
can be offered, and include so-called modified open and modified closed rules as well as completely closed
rules and rules providing for consideration in the House as opposed to the Committee of the Whole. This
definition of restrictive rule is taken from the Republican chart of resolutions reported from the Rules
Committee in the 103d Congress. N/A means not available.
Legislation in the 104th Congress, 2nd Session
To date 13 out of 23, or 57% of the bills considered under
rules in the 2nd session of the 104th Congress have been
considered under an irregular procedure which circumvents the
standard committee procedure. They have been brought to the
floor without any committee reporting them. They are as
follows:
H.R. 1643, to authorize the extension of nondiscriminatory
treatment (MFN) to the products of Bulgaria.
H.J. Res. 134, making continuing appropriations for fiscal
year 1996.
H.R. 1358, conveyance of National Marine Fisheries Service
Laboratory at Gloucester, Massachusetts.
H.R. 2924, the Social Security Guarantee Act.
H.R. 3021, to guarantee the continuing full investment of
Social Security and other Federal funds in obligations of the
United States.
H.R. 3019, a further downpayment toward a balanced budget.
H.R. 2703, the effective Death Penalty and Public Safety
Act of 1996.
H.J. Res. 165, making further continuing appropriations for
fiscal year 1996.
H.R. 125, the Crime Enforcement and Second Amendment
Restoration Act of 1996.
H.R. 3136, the Contract With America Advancement Act of
1996.
H.J. Res. 159, tax limitation constitutional amendment.
H.R. 1675, National Wildlife Refuge Improvement Act of
1995.
H.J. Res. 175, making further continuing appropriations for
fiscal year 1996.
the tradition of open rules under democratic management of the house
Mr. Speaker, several times during this debate my Republican
colleagues have asserted that the Department of Defense authorization
bill was never before considered under an open rule and therefore they
are justified in restricting amendments and not permitting debate on
the amount of money to be spent on ballistic missiles or environmental
restoration or, in total, on defense.
In fact, the longstanding tradition of the House, when the Democratic
Party controlled this body, was to consider DOD authorization bills
under an open rule. Until the 99th Congress, all DOD authorization
bills were considered under open rules. For example, in each session of
the 98th Congress the annual DOD authorization bill was considered
under an open rule (H. Res. 197 and H. Res. 494). If Republicans had
offered an open rule, it would not have been the first such rule for
consideration of this important annual authorization bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
California [Mr. Dellums].
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas [Mr.
Frost] for his generosity in yielding this time to me, and, Mr. Speaker
and Members, we come to the close of this debate. As I said earlier,
this is a debate on the procedure by which we will discuss the military
policy of this country. Let me try to place that in proper context.
We now find ourselves in the context of a post-cold-war world, a
significant period in American world history. We do not even know quite
how to name it. We simply call it post-cold war. But it is a moment
that provides with it an enormous opportunity, Mr. Speaker, an enormous
opportunity to redefine our national security agenda, redefine our
national security strategy in the context of the realities of the post-
cold-war world.
I believe that that new post-cold-war national security strategy
ought to embrace three elements: First, a healthy, vibrant American
economy, which means a well-educated, well-informed, well-trained
American citizenry, healthy, where there is a commitment to full
employment, commitment to our children, commitment to our future.
The second element of our national security strategy ought to be a
foreign policy rooted in the notions of prevention, where there is a
heavier reliance on political, economic, social and diplomatic
solutions to problems that would preclude the need to go to the
extraordinary step of war.
And, finally, the third element of our national security strategy: a
properly sized, properly trained, properly equipped military to meet
the realities as we move toward the 21st century.
This military budget addresses that third element.
This military budget, as I said earlier, is to the tune of $267
billion.
Mr. Speaker, let me place that in context for people who do not
understand. America's military budget is roughly equivalent to all the
other military budgets in the world combined, and if we add the
military budgets of America's allies in Europe and in Asia, our
friends, combine those budgets, America and its friends spend in excess
of 80 percent of the world's military budget, leaving slightly over 19
percent of the rest of the world's military budget in the hands of,
quote, potential adversaries.
We are outspending the rest of the world, the United States and its
friends, four to one. So this notion about America's military budget
falling apart is a farce; it is a bizarre notion,
But we ought to intellectually grapple with each other, Mr. Speaker.
I am prepared to lay down old labels, old ideas, old paradigms, old
policy and old programs, but let us talk about it. There is a fiscal
dimension to this. The people who put $13 billion see great dangers and
see the need to march forward almost in cold war fashion. But there are
those of us who see the potential, the possibilities and the great
promise of moving the world away from war and moving the world away
from the need to spend so much money on defense.
We ought to, irrespective of whether we agree or disagree, have the
right to debate these matters free and open, and all I ask, in
conclusion, Mr. Speaker, is the opportunity for free and open debate.
It does not have to be an open rule. We can have a substantive debate
without having open rule.
This rule is so constricted and so confined that we cannot even get
to the intelligent rationale that ought to be the business of the
United States Congress.
I urge my colleagues to oppose this rule, go back and give us the
opportunity to stand here and carry out our responsibilities as
dignified Members of the Congress.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has 2\1/2\
minutes remaining.
Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I will not use all of our time. I will be
as brief as I can just to point out the gentleman seems to be concerned
at our level of defense spending. He complains that our budget is much
bigger than it should be. Yet just look across the Pacific, look at the
country of the People's Republic of China who in the last several years
have doubled their defense budget, doubled their defense budget, and
are using, and I will not yield at this point; my colleague should not
interrupt a closer. The People's Republic of China are taking the
weapons that they are producing today and giving it to the stated
terrorist nation enemies, professed enemies of this country like Iran,
Iraq, Libya, and others, and North Korea. This country's first
obligation is to be prepared militarily to defend the interests of the
United States of America around this world. That is what this budget
does.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time and I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
[[Page H4836]]
Mr. DELLUMS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a
quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Evidently a quorum is not present.
The Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were yeas--235,
nays 149, not voting 49, as follows:
[Roll No. 166]
YEAS--235
Abercrombie
Allard
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bereuter
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bliley
Blute
Boehlert
Bonilla
Bono
Brewster
Browder
Brown (FL)
Bryant (TN)
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Chrysler
Clayton
Clement
Clinger
Coble
Coburn
Coleman
Collins (GA)
Combest
Cooley
Cox
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cremeans
Cubin
Davis
de la Garza
Deal
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Dixon
Doolittle
Dornan
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
English
Everett
Ewing
Fawell
Flanagan
Foley
Forbes
Fowler
Fox
Franks (CT)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frisa
Frost
Funderburk
Gekas
Geren
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Green (TX)
Greene (UT)
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (TX)
Hancock
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Heineman
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hunter
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (RI)
Kim
King
Kingston
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Lightfoot
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Longley
Lucas
Manton
Manzullo
McCollum
McCrery
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McKeon
Meek
Metcalf
Meyers
Mica
Miller (FL)
Mollohan
Montgomery
Moorhead
Murtha
Myers
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Ortiz
Oxley
Packard
Parker
Petri
Pombo
Porter
Pryce
Quillen
Quinn
Radanovich
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Richardson
Riggs
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Rose
Roth
Royce
Salmon
Saxton
Schaefer
Schiff
Seastrand
Sensenbrenner
Shadegg
Shaw
Shuster
Sisisky
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stenholm
Stockman
Stump
Talent
Tate
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Tejeda
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Torkildsen
Traficant
Vucanovich
Walker
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wilson
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--149
Ackerman
Andrews
Baesler
Baldacci
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Beilenson
Bentsen
Bishop
Bonior
Borski
Boucher
Brown (CA)
Bryant (TX)
Bunn
Cardin
Castle
Chapman
Clyburn
Collins (MI)
Condit
Costello
Coyne
Cummings
Danner
DeFazio
DeLauro
Dellums
Deutsch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle
Durbin
Engel
Eshoo
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Fazio
Fields (LA)
Filner
Flake
Foglietta
Frank (MA)
Furse
Ganske
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gonzalez
Gordon
Gutierrez
Hamilton
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hoke
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jacobs
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (SD)
Johnston
Kanjorski
Kennedy (MA)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kleczka
LaFalce
Lantos
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lincoln
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney
Martinez
Martini
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy
McDermott
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Millender-McDonald
Minge
Mink
Moran
Morella
Nadler
Neal
Obey
Olver
Orton
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne (NJ)
Payne (VA)
Pelosi
Peterson (FL)
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Poshard
Rahall
Reed
Rivers
Roemer
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanders
Sanford
Sawyer
Schumer
Scott
Serrano
Shays
Skaggs
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Spratt
Stark
Stokes
Studds
Thurman
Torres
Torricelli
Towns
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Volkmer
Ward
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weller
Wise
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Zimmer
NOT VOTING--49
Baker (CA)
Baker (LA)
Berman
Bevill
Boehner
Brown (OH)
Brownback
Clay
Collins (IL)
Conyers
Cunningham
Dickey
Dicks
Dooley
Ensign
Fields (TX)
Ford
Gallegly
Gejdenson
Gunderson
Hall (OH)
Hayes
Herger
Holden
Jefferson
Jones
Kaptur
Laughlin
Markey
McDade
Menendez
Miller (CA)
Moakley
Molinari
Paxon
Portman
Roberts
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Scarborough
Schroeder
Skelton
Stupak
Tanner
Thornton
Tiahrt
Weldon (PA)
Williams
Zeliff
{time} 1347
The Clerk announced the following pairs:
On this vote:
Mr. Dicks for, with Mr. Moakley against.
Mr. Herger for, with Mrs. Collins of Illinois against.
Mr. Scarborough for, with Mr. Conyers against.
Mrs. KENNELLY and Mr. SANFORD changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
So the resolution was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________