[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 32 (Thursday, March 13, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1000-H1001]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. BONIOR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I rise to engage in a colloquy with my 
friend from New York [Mr. Solomon] about the schedule for the remainder 
of the week and for next week.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to my friend from New York.
  Mr. SOLOMON. My good friend, the minority whip, I would say to him, 
Mr. Speaker, that we are pleased to announce the House has completed 
its work for the week and there will be no more votes today or for the 
rest of the week.
  The House will next meet at 2 p.m. on the infamous day of Monday, 
March 17; I think some others than the Scotch that I am would refer to 
that as St. Patrick's Day; for a pro forma session. Of course there 
will be no legislative business and no votes on that day.
  On Tuesday, March 18, we will meet at 12:30 p.m. for morning hour and 
2 p.m. for legislative business. Members should note that any recorded 
votes will be postponed until 5 p.m. on Tuesday, March 18.
  Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday we hope to consider the following five bills 
under suspension of the rules. They are:
  H.R. 924, the Victim Allocution Clarification Act of 1997; H.R. 927, 
the U.S. Marshals Improvement Act; H.R. 672, a bill containing 
technical amendments to copyright laws; H.R. 908, a bill to establish a 
commission on structural alternatives for the Federal Court of Appeals, 
and H.R. 514, a bill to permit the waiver of D.C. residency 
requirements for certain employees of the office of the D.C. Inspector 
General.
  Also on Tuesday, March 18, the House will consider under an open rule 
H.R. 412, the Oroville-Tonasket Claims Settlement Act; that is under an 
open rule.
  The House will meet for legislative business at 11 a.m. on Wednesday, 
March 19, and at 10 a.m. on Thursday, March 20. We plan to take up the 
following measures, all of which will be subject to rules:
  H.R. 1, the Working Families Flexibility Act of 1997; H.R. 929, a 
bill to ban partial-birth abortions, and H.Res. 91, a resolution 
providing amounts for the expenses of certain House committees for the 
105th Congress.
  We hope to conclude business and begin the spring district work 
period by 6 p.m. on Thursday, March 20, and I would thank the gentleman 
for yielding to me to explain this to the membership.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his explanation. I 
have just a couple of questions I would like to pose to him if he would 
indulge me for a second here.
  On Tuesday H.R. 412, the bill that follows the suspension, the 
Oroville-Tonasket Claim Settlement Act; that is under an open rule on 
the floor. Does the gentleman from New York expect to complete that 
bill on Tuesday?
  Mr. SOLOMON. Yes, we do.
  Mr. BONIOR. So it could be into the evening on Tuesday?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I do not expect we would go--that is not a very 
controversial bill, and I would expect we would be out sixish or even 
sooner perhaps.
  Mr. BONIOR. Just so that the gentleman is aware, there is opposition 
to it on our side of the aisle, and I just want the gentleman----
  Mr. SOLOMON. I know of one significant amendment that we discussed in 
the Committee on Rules.
  Mr. BONIOR. So it may take a while and Members might be apprised that 
it may run a little bit beyond 6 o'clock. I just want the gentleman to 
know that.
  And on Wednesday and Thursday, 19 and 20, my colleague mentioned the 
three bills. Does he know which day he is going to bring them up yet? 
H.R. 1?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I say to the minority whip that he is a former member of 
the Committee on Rules and served there with me for many years. We 
expect to take up on the floor the Working Families Flexibility Act. It 
will be under a

[[Page H1001]]

fair structured rule. That will certainly be the first taken up.
  Mr. BONIOR. Wednesday maybe for that bill?
  Mr. SOLOMON. Excuse me?
  Mr. BONIOR. Is the gentleman from New York anticipating maybe 
Wednesday for that particular bill?
  Mr. SOLOMON. Yes.
  Mr. BONIOR. OK.
  Mr. SOLOMON. And we are uncertain as to which of the next two would 
be brought up first, the ban on partial-birth abortions and the 
resolution providing amounts for the expenses of certain House 
committees for the 105th Congress. They both will most likely be 
brought up on Thursday.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman from 
Michigan yield to me.
  Mr. BONIOR. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. I was delighted to hear my friend from 
New York say that the flexibility bill would be brought up under a fair 
structured rule, obviously meaning amendments would be allowed.
  May I safely assume that the other two important bills would also be 
brought up under fair structured rules and allowing amendments that 
week?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I can assure the gentleman. He knows that I made a 
personal commitment, as did Speaker Gingrich, that we would be at least 
as fair as the Democrats were always to us and probably much fairer.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. If the gentleman would yield again, I am 
glad to know he is flexible. May I ask my question again? The gentleman 
said there would be a fair structured rule. Does that mean that there 
would also be a fair structured rule of the same sort to the other 
bills?
  Mr. SOLOMON. I would think so, although we have a fair Committee on 
Rules and we always take the minority in consultation, and we will have 
to make that decision. I certainly do not want to speak for all nine of 
them.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. We will settle for the gentleman's 
commitment.
  Mr. SOLOMON. My commitment is always to be fair.
  Mr. BONIOR. I just want the gentleman to understand on the committee 
funding bill there is an immense amount of controversy on that bill and 
concern on our side with respect to the division of funding, and I hope 
it is not the last thing we do before we break for spring because I 
just want the gentleman to be aware that there are very strong feelings 
by our ranking and senior Members with respect to the funding of that 
bill.
  So I hope we can work some things out next week on it, but if we 
cannot, I do not think it would be wise to make that the last order of 
business.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me just mention that the gentleman was 
patient in the debate we had this afternoon with respect to the 
paperwork reduction bill, specifically the previous question that dealt 
with campaign finance reform. I just want the gentleman to know with 
the deepest amount of respect how strongly we feel on our side of the 
aisle about that bill, about having--not that bill, that process, and 
having something coming to the floor. We can discuss a variety of bills 
and approaches, and we will be pressing that--as the gentleman probably 
was able to ascertain from our efforts today, we will be pressing that 
on a regular basis, and we are hopeful that in a fair, bipartisan 
manner we can have this out on the floor where we get a full debate and 
we can do it in a timely fashion.
  Now we do not expect it to be done next week or perhaps within the 
next month. We expect some idea of when we as a body can address this 
issue, which is a growing cancer on the Democratic institution that we 
love so much here.
  So I just want the gentleman to know up front where we are coming 
from, if he has not figured it out, and I am sure he has by now, about 
how strongly we feel about this, and I thank him so much.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, first of all I 
want to thank him for thanking me for being patient this afternoon. 
Sometimes that is hard to do, but we certainly are trying to have some 
comity in the House that will allow us to have meaningful work 
produced, and, as the gentleman knows, campaign finance reform is a 
very complex and important issue.
  Unfortunately, or fortunately, whichever way one looks at it, we are 
bound by the U.S. Constitution. There are people like me that would 
like to bring a bill to the floor yesterday for full financial 
disclosure on everything, and I feel very strongly about that, just as 
strongly as the gentleman does on other aspects. But because it is 
complex, because we are bound by the Constitution, we have to make sure 
that what we do is going to stand the constitutional test, and that is 
going to take some time, but I do believe that this issue is going to 
be dealt with, and the gentleman has my assurances to help him make 
sure that we bring a meaningful bill to the floor that can be enforced, 
not like the present laws, which have been broken, as the gentleman 
knows, and which need to be enforced.
  Mr. BONIOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, and I would say in 
just brief response that it is just not a bill that we are interested 
in. We are interested in having their idea come to the floor as well as 
the myriad of ideas that we have out here to resolve this. The Senate 
is already moving on dealing with a constitutional amendment, and it 
seems to me that we ought to be at least discussing when, in fact, we 
will have our day. I frankly think this needs a week, a full week at 
least, of discussion on the floor because of its importance to the 
Democratic process and our lives, and our lives, which in many ways are 
out of control because of what we have got to go through, the hurdles 
that all of us have to go through, to compete in this insane system 
that we are living in.
  So I thank my colleague, and I want to make sure that his disclosure 
bill has an opportunity, and I may indeed support it, but I think other 
opportunities ought to be available as well, and we wish the gentleman 
from New York a good weekend.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would 
yield, I also want to say this is my day to be delighted at the 
resolution of my friend from New York. I was particularly pleased to 
hear him pledge absolute fealty to the Supreme Court's interpretation 
of the Constitution as governing what we do, and I look forward to our 
being very closely governed by what the Supreme Court says we can and 
cannot do for the rest of the year.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will just yield further, I 
know Members probably want to go home for the evening, but I am just 
sure that no American expects a doctor to prescribe surgery until he 
has done a thorough examination, and I am going to tell the gentleman 
my colleagues all know I have been very much involved in what has been 
going on with what I consider scandals on not only breaking campaign 
laws. Those are very important laws. As my colleague knows, one single 
little violation is subject to a $5,000 fine and/or 5 years in jail 
and, lord knows, there have been so many violations, and we really need 
to get to the bottom of those, see what it is, and I think that will 
lead us into maybe some meaningful legislation to perhaps correct some 
of those illegal activities that have been going on.
  And I thank the gentleman, and I wish him a very happy weekend as 
well.

                          ____________________