[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 129 (Wednesday, September 24, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H7741-H7754]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 2209, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT,
1998
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 238 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will suspend.
Point of order
Mr. HINCHEY. Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Hinchey]
will state his point of order.
Mr. HINCHEY. My point of order, Mr. Speaker, is that the House is
currently being operated in a disorderly fashion.
Mr. McINNIS. That is not a point of order.
Mr. HINCHEY. The propensity of the majority to schedule long hiatuses
day after day in the middle of the proceedings in order that some
Members may socialize betrays not just a lack of consideration----
Mr. McINNIS. Regular order.
Mr. HINCHEY. Of the Members, but it betrays also a deep-seated----
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, regular order.
Mr. HINCHEY. The House is being operated in a disorderly manner.
Mr. McINNIS. Regular order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has not stated a
proper point of order.
The gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] is recognized.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I
call up House Resolution 238 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 238
Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be
in order to consider the conference report to accompany the
bill (H.R. 2209) making appropriations for the Legislative
Branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for
other purposes. All points of order against the conference
report and against its consideration are waived.
[[Page H7742]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] is
recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall], pending
which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration
of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purposes of debate
only.
Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 238 is a straightforward resolution.
The proposed bill waives all points of order against the conference
report and against its consideration. This resolution was reported out
of the Committee on Rules by a voice vote.
Mr. Speaker, this appropriation bill, which provides the funds for
operations of the House, the Senate, and entities such as the Library
of Congress, often serves as a lightning rod for partisan conflicts.
However, during the course of the debate on House Resolution 238 I hope
Members will keep in mind that we are debating a simple, plain vanilla,
rule.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule, and I reserve
the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] explained,
this resolution is a rule waiving all points of order against the
conference report to accompany H.R. 2209, a bill making appropriations
for the legislative branch for fiscal year 1998.
The bill appropriates a total of $2.2 billion for the operations of
Congress and other agencies in the legislative branch. This amount is a
modest 2-percent higher than last year's appropriation.
Too often consideration of the legislative branch funding bill
becomes an opportunity to criticize Congress. However, I want to take
this opportunity to point out our achievements. Congress is the most
responsive agency in the Federal Government. More than any other
agency, we are the ones who can act immediately to solve problems and
make changes.
As the Federal Government expanded over the past two decades,
Congress kept down the increase in its spending. The men and women who
make up the Members and staff of this institution are honorable, they
are hard-working public servants dedicated to making the country a
better place.
This year we approved a plan to balance the budget, and this is an
achievement that will be a lasting contribution to future generations
of Americans. So as we take up the bill to fund Congress, I want to
emphasize that this is money well spent for the American people.
Mr. Speaker, the rule was approved by the Committee on Rules on a
voice vote with no objections. I urge adoption of the rule.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr.
Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, today, we are dealing with a rule on legislative
appropriations for the House of Representatives. I rise to speak on
this rule because I am also deeply concerned that while we are dealing
with the funding of the formal operations of the Congress of the United
States in terms of the nuts and bolts that keep this place going from
year to year, I am deeply concerned that we are not addressing another
problem of funding of the Congress of the United States. That is the
manner in which Members of Congress fund their campaigns.
Somehow we are able to deal with those provisions of law that deal
with the paper clips, the pencils, the paper, the notebooks, and
everything else that goes into the Congress of the United States, but
what we are not able to deal with is the issue of how we fund our
campaigns, how Members of Congress get here and how Members of Congress
stay here.
We now are witnessing across the entire Government of the United
States, except for the House of Representatives, a commitment to debate
and to propose campaign finance reform. The President of the United
States has called for that. In fact, over 2 years ago, he shook hands
with the Speaker of the House. Yesterday, he sent a letter to the
Senate saying he would expect the Senate and would keep the Senate in
session if a proper debate could not be had on campaign finance reform.
Senator Daschle closed the Senate down yesterday, and finally Senator
Lott agreed that they would in fact schedule a full and open debate on
campaign finance reform measures in the Senate.
Yet, we have had no response, in spite of bipartisan letters, in
spite of calls from Members of the Republican Caucus, in spite of
letters from the Democrats, in spite of a handshake with the President
of the United States, an appeal by the President of the United States
for campaign finance reform in a State of the Union Message, we have
had no response except ``no'' from the Republican leadership of the
House.
A far more serious question than the formal funding that this
resolution makes in order in the legislative appropriations bill is the
informal funding that goes on around here. We are now seeing the
influence of soft money on the decisionmaking process within the
Congress of the United States, how bills are scheduled, how amendments
are scheduled, how bills are not scheduled and how amendments are not
scheduled.
What we have learned in the hearings in the Senate is that soft money
is about access; it is about access to committee chairmen, it is about
access to the President of the United States, it is about access to the
Vice President of the United States, it is about access to the
leadership in the House and the Senate.
Letters go out on almost a monthly basis saying, if you give us
$10,000 or $25,000, you can sit down with the chairman of your choice,
the committee chairman of your choice of jurisdiction where you have
legislation, you can have a private meeting, a private dinner, a
private lunch.
That is unacceptable. That is unacceptable. That is the funding we
should be discussing in the House of Representatives. But to date,
unfortunately, in spite of all the public record that has been
displayed, we are unable to address campaign finance reform.
Announcement by the Speaker pro tempore
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would advise Members they should
not refer to debate on actions or inactions of the other body.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Doggett].
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, the rule that we are considering at this
time concerns legislative appropriations and the expenditure of $2.2
billion of taxpayer money. But the American people should not labor
under the misassumption that that is the only money involved in the
operation of this body. The $2.2 billion pays for the actual operations
of all aspects of this body. But a considerable additional amount of
money is involved in what brings each Member of this body here to spend
the $2.2 billion. That is, the hundreds of a million dollars that are
being spent in the campaigns that bring Members to this legislative
branch where that $2.2 billion is involved.
{time} 1215
This morning we have had a series of votes. We have had a series of
objections. And undoubtedly, there are some Members of this body who
view those as inconvenient, as troublesome. But I would emphasize that
they are about very serious, substantive matters.
Unlike the other body, it is not possible under the rules of this
House, under the rule that is being debated here this morning, for us
to offer an amendment on campaign finance reform. Our hands are
completely tied behind our backs in this House, unlike the other body,
and our ability to come to this floor and say let us have a simple and
direct ban on soft money which is being used to soften up the political
leadership in this House, the corrupting influence of soft money, we
cannot come forward and simply offer an amendment to this rule or to
this bill to accomplish that objective. And, so, the only way to focus
the attention of the American people on this issue is with the types of
motions and objections that are being made, not out of any frivolity,
indeed because they go to the heart of our democracy and the way that
democracy is being corrupted by the soft money system.
We are in the course, given the total stonewall we have, even after
the
[[Page H7743]]
President says he will call this Congress back into special session,
even after half the road is cleared thanks to the leadership of the
minority leader and the Senate committees are stopped, even after all
that we are told no vote, no consideration even of Republican proposals
to deal with this campaign finance issue.
All that we can do is go to the Speaker and say it is going to take
him more time not to consider campaign finance reform than it would to
consider campaign finance reform and let all of these proposals come
forward. The freshmen Members, in a bipartisan basis, say ban soft
money, do something about these problems. There are Members of the
Republican side and of the Democratic side who have ideas to advance.
But the Speaker's response is, we do not need less money in our
campaigns. We need more, more campaign ads, more television ads.
This bill deals with one part of the legislative process. But anyone
who watches this process knows that it is much more than the $2.2
billion; it is the influence peddling going on outside; it is the
``yield right of way'' sign yielding to the special interests that
influence this operation.
Today we have a chance to begin to change that, and that is why we
will have more motions and more votes and more action, because we
cannot let this matter be delayed. This is our last chance to influence
the cleanup of the 1998 elections.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I find the comments somewhat interesting from the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. Doggett] and from the gentleman from
California [Mr. Miller].
First of all, I note, with some interest, that both of the gentlemen
have voted twice today to adjourn the House. I understand that there is
a golf game or something recreational that is necessary. But let me ask
them this. We have got work to do here. Today we have spent hours of
time wasted on procedural motions to adjourn the House. What our side
of the aisle is asking, and by the way, a good portion of your side of
the aisle agrees with us, we need to go to work. We have got a lot of
work to do. We have got a lot of budgetary issues to consider, and we
ought to do it.
Here is a perfect example. Mr. Speaker, this rule was
noncontroversial. This rule was passed by voice vote out of the
Committee on Rules last night. This rule is supported by the gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. Hall]. In fact, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall] has
encouraged a vote for it. But instead, we are now going to convert.
They have invited me to participate in a debate regarding campaign
finance reform, and I will accept that invitation, although somewhat
limited. First of all, I would hope that the gentleman who brought this
issue will also devote a good deal of time to the article in the
headlines today, ``Democratic National Committee-Teamsters Traded
Funds.''
There are laws against that kind of thing. We have laws in the books
right now. Listening to what my colleagues say out there, they give the
perception to the American people that there are not laws regarding
campaign finance reform. There are lots of laws out there.
The fact is, in my opinion, that they have been broken. So instead of
trying to divert from the fact that the laws have been broken by saying
we need more laws, let us enforce the laws that we have got.
I would hope that my colleagues put their energy and resources into
going to the Democratic National Committee today and say, ``Hey,
fellas, even though I am a Democrat, even though I have a special
interest in this party, I want us to lay out to the American people,
let us be truthful, let us find out what we did with the Teamsters.''
Furthermore, I would suggest that maybe they take a foreign trip. We
have got a break coming up. Help us find some of these witnesses like
Charlie Trie or John Huang and some of these people that have
conveniently disappeared out of our reach so we cannot find out what
went on. Let us find out what went on, determine what we have to stop
that, and what laws were broken. And then if we find a hole in the law
or a way around the law, then let us do something about it.
I also want to point out an article which I read in Roll Call. I
think it was yesterday's Roll Call. ``With support building in both
Chambers for a complete ban on soft money, sources said that Democrats
like Fazio and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman
Martin Frost,'' your colleague from the State of Texas, ``have been
working furiously behind the scenes to reach a compromise that would
save the currently unlimited and unregulated contributions from
extermination.''
Let us be serious about this. First of all, we have got work to do.
Quit doing those motions to adjourn time after time. You know that
every time, and I speak in a generic form, the people that support this
motion, the people that make this motion to adjourn, the American
people are out there, they do not vote to go home from work at 10
o'clock in the morning. We were wasting our time here on this House
floor voting on a motion to adjourn.
By the way, on the first vote, only one Republican voted to go home
at 10 o'clock in the morning. Every other Republican here said we ought
to stay and work. But my colleagues from Texas and California voted to
go home at 10 o'clock in the morning. And that was not good enough, the
rest of the body said, no, we are not going to go home at 10 o'clock.
We are going to work.
We have got work to complete in these Chambers What happens? Well,
the clock gets close to 12 and apparently some of my colleagues feel we
put in a complete workday, time to adjourn and go home or go to the
golf course or down to the racquet club.
My colleagues, we have got business to do. Let us get on with our
business, and let us focus on the subject at hand, which is a rule. If
my colleagues want to debate the rest of the time we have this morning
on this rule on campaign finance reform, I look forward to it.
Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McINNIS. No, I will not yield. It seems to me, if I remember
procedural order, I have the floor. Am I incorrect?
If my colleagues would like to proceed with the people's business,
which is to get this rule out of the way and let us get to the bill, we
have got a lot of work to do, then let us proceed. It is up to my
colleagues.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Texas [Mr. Frost].
Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall] on
the Committee on Rules for yielding me the time.
Since the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] on the other side of
the aisle mentioned my name, I did want to take this opportunity to
make it very clear that I support the efforts to pass campaign finance
reform this year.
There is a difference of opinion as to what the content of that
legislation should be. There are legitimate, honest differences of
opinion on what should be in the bill. But I fully support the efforts
of the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] and others to force a
vote on this legislation this year. There should be no misunderstanding
about that.
To the extent that the other side does not want this vote, does not
want to have a vote on this issue this year, they are not serving the
interest of the American public. There are legitimate differences of
opinion about how we should reform the process. There is no difference
of opinion about the fact that we should reform the process.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from California [Mr. Miller].
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I would just say that I
appreciate that the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. McInnis] has raised
the issue of procedural motions.
As the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Doggett] has pointed out, there is
nothing else we can do. And he must understand what we have seen now
throughout this entire session: If we do nothing, nothing will happen.
Because the Republican leadership that controls the schedule, that
controls the agenda has determined that we cannot have a debate on
campaign finance reform.
[[Page H7744]]
So there is nothing left for us to do than to raise these procedural
motions to try to raise the visibility in the public's mind and in the
press as to what is going on on the Republican side. And that is the
old four-corner stall in UCLA. They are hoping to play ``beat the
clock,'' that if they can pretend like they are doing the people's
business, this is not about the people's business, but if they were
doing the people's business, we would be reforming the campaign finance
system.
That locks the people out of the election, allows a special interest,
this allows special money in and huge contributions to overwhelm people
who try to participate in elections. That is why we have the majority
leader in the Senate and Speaker of the House proposing a $50 billion
tax rebate for the tobacco companies, because the tobacco companies
were the biggest contributors to the party, and in the middle of the
night they got what they wanted.
But the people did not want a $50 billion tax cut for tobacco
companies. It is rather interesting when we forced them to vote in the
light of day, it was unanimous. Only three people voted against it in
the Senate, unanimous in the House. That is the difference between
doing the people's business and doing the special interest business.
We will continue to call these votes because the gentleman from
Georgia [Mr. Gingrich] leaves us no alternatives. We apologize for the
inconvenience. But what is at stake here is the democratic institution
of which we serve and the democratic process of electing people,
whether or not we will turn that over to the special interests in this
country, as opposed to the people from the constituencies which we are
elected. That is what the struggle is here. That is what the debate is
about.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I am enthralled by the energy level of the gentleman
from California [Mr. Miller]. I like that kind of enthusiasm, and I
hope that the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller], No. 1, puts that
enthusiasm to doing the people's business and quit supporting these
motions to adjourn.
We have got work to do. Put the golf game aside, forget the racquet
club. They can do that on Saturday and Sunday. But more importantly, I
hope the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller] finds time this
afternoon to go back to the office and pursue this headline
``Democratic National Committee-Teamsters Traded Funds.''
What is going on? I hope that we have that kind of vigor and that
kind of strength when he talks on the floor about saying we need to get
to the bottom of what has happened to the Teamsters. We need to get the
people's work done in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr.
Wolf].
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado [Mr.
McInnis] for yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, I was sitting in my office, and I wanted to kind of tell
the people what I feel, whether they like it really or not. I think
both sides are destroying this institution.
Your side ought to stop calling these votes, and our side ought to
stop recessing between the hours of 6 and 9 so people can go to dinners
downtown and then keep those of us who have families here in town
locked in our rooms where we have to wait for people to come back.
Last night we recessed from 6 until 9, we did no business. And we
stayed here until 10:30. Tonight we are not going to do any business
and votes between the hours of 6 and 9. Those of us who have families,
those of us who live here, the staff, these people out here, the staff,
the guards, the restaurants, and everybody else, they stay here when we
stay here.
Your side is destroying this institution, and our side is destroying
this institution. Stop calling the votes. Stop calling the votes. Let
me just tell the gentleman, I do not take money from the tobacco
interests and I come from a tobacco State, And I am for abolishing soft
money. And for this side, stop calling and recessing between the hours
of 6 and 9. Let us work like regular people.
My closing comment is, and I hope they do not take the time from me,
we are living a dysfunctional life in a dysfunctional institution, and
dysfunctional things come out of living it. Both sides ought to stop
what they are doing.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, to the gentleman from
Virginia [Mr. Wolf], let me just tell him, if I were the majority
leader, we would work 24 hours a day. Every time they put up a motion
to adjourn this House in the middle of the day or beginning of the day,
and I used to be a majority leader in the State of Colorado, we will
just work, we will just work around the clock. We have got business to
do, and we ought to get it done.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HALL of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume to respond to what my friend the gentleman from Virginia [Mr.
Wolf] said.
The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf] is my best friend in the
Congress of the United States. I, 100 percent, endorse what he had to
say. I think that we have had enough conversation on issues relative to
campaign finance at this particular time. I think it is time to pass
the rule.
As I said before, this legislative branch funding is a very modest
increase. I think that I have tried to point out the achievements of
this Congress from the standpoint of some of the bills and some of the
things that we have passed. I just want to say that there are
tremendous people here in the Congress, both Republican and Democrat. I
think that they are doing their best, people of good character. They
work hard. And I think that sometimes we tear each other down to the
point where it reflects upon us.
{time} 1230
I am sick and tired of it, too, like the gentleman from Virginia [Mr.
Wolf]. I want to see us start to stand up for what we are all about. We
do good things here. We have good staffs. I would say 99 percent of the
people here are people of good character. Yet if you were to ask the
people in the country about us, the way we fight, squabble, and jump up
and down sometimes, we do not do ourselves justice. I think it is time
to get on and pass this rule and get over with the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I think that the gentleman from Ohio, who, by the way, in my opinion,
is one of the most respected Members of the House, is certainly a
professional, he is a gentleman, and his points are well taken. I
should point out, though, contrary to what the gentleman from Virginia
[Mr. Wolf] said, the gentleman from Virginia lives close to the
Capitol. I live a long way from the Capitol. My district geographically
is larger than the State of Florida. It takes me a long time to get
there. It takes me a long time to get across there. I would rather work
late hours at night so I can get back to my district.
I think in defense of the majority leader, the fact that last night
we scheduled votes so we had a bunch of votes at 10 o'clock instead of
votes between 8 and 10 o'clock in the evening was to accommodate
Members and their families so that they can go out and have dinner and
know that we will delay the votes; or not delay them from voting, the
debate still continues, the House still has action, but we will move
the votes to a period of time. So I think the criticism here, while I
understand the frustration of what is going on, I must say that some of
this scheduling is done for the convenience of Members so they can have
dinner with their families.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona [Mr.
Hayworth].
Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Colorado for
yielding me this time. I listened with great interest to the debate. I
do respect the gentleman from Ohio a great deal, the minority member
who is managing his side's debate on this rule.
I have just one point to clear up with the gentleman from California.
Rather than some sort of sports tactic involving basketball, sadly what
we are seeing from some intense partisans on the other side is more of
a football technique called the misdirection play,
[[Page H7745]]
where you try to draw attention away from misdeeds and causes of
concern.
I believe it is especially important for us to go on record in this
Congress as saying that everyone who runs for political office,
including those in the executive branch, should obey existing law.
There is the point from whence the problem stems, not any far-flung
notion or vision of new campaign reform. And the question comes, sadly,
as questions develop as relevant as today's headlines, what type of
influences are out there? We should answer those questions with
existing law.
Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, again I want to express that I consider it
a privilege to work with the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hall] in these
kind of things. Again I appreciate his comments.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the
previous question on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bereuter). The question is on ordering
the previous question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. MILLER of California. 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.
Pursuant to clause 5 of rule XV, the Chair will reduce to a minimum
of 5 minutes the period of time for any electronic vote, if ordered, on
the question of agreeing of the resolution.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 237,
nays 186, not voting 10, as follows:
[Roll No. 430]
YEAS--237
Aderholt
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Ballenger
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Bereuter
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bliley
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bono
Boucher
Brady
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Cook
Cooksey
Cox
Crane
Crapo
Cubin
Cunningham
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeLay
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dingell
Doolittle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Everett
Ewing
Fawell
Foley
Forbes
Fowler
Fox
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goodlatte
Goodling
Goss
Graham
Granger
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hamilton
Hansen
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jenkins
Johnson (CT)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kasich
Kelly
Kim
King (NY)
Kingston
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaHood
Largent
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lucas
Manzullo
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McKeon
Metcalf
Mica
Miller (FL)
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Obey
Oxley
Packard
Pappas
Parker
Paul
Paxon
Pease
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pitts
Pombo
Porter
Portman
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Regula
Riggs
Riley
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roukema
Royce
Ryun
Sabo
Salmon
Sanford
Saxton
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Shimkus
Shuster
Skeen
Smith (MI)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Stearns
Stump
Sununu
Talent
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Traficant
Upton
Walsh
Wamp
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wolf
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--186
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Baldacci
Barcia
Barrett (WI)
Becerra
Bentsen
Berman
Berry
Bishop
Blagojevich
Blumenauer
Bonior
Borski
Boswell
Boyd
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Capps
Cardin
Carson
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Coyne
Cramer
Cummings
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Deutsch
Dicks
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doyle
Edwards
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Farr
Fattah
Fazio
Filner
Ford
Frank (MA)
Frost
Furse
Gejdenson
Gephardt
Goode
Gordon
Green
Gutierrez
Hall (TX)
Harman
Hefner
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hooley
Hoyer
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
John
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, E.B.
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind (WI)
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Lampson
Lantos
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Lowey
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McIntyre
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Nadler
Neal
Oberstar
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Pickett
Pomeroy
Poshard
Price (NC)
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Schumer
Scott
Serrano
Sherman
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith, Adam
Snyder
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stenholm
Stokes
Strickland
Stupak
Tanner
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson
Thurman
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Turner
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Wexler
Weygand
Wise
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
NOT VOTING--10
Bonilla
Dellums
Flake
Foglietta
Gonzalez
Hastings (FL)
Hunter
Kennelly
Redmond
Schiff
{time} 1252
Mr. CLYBURN and Mr. SPRATT changed their vote from ``yea'' to
``nay.''
Mr. EWING changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bereuter). The question is on the
resolution.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Recorded Vote
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 408,
noes 5, not voting 20, as follows:
[Roll No. 431]
AYES--408
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Armey
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (NE)
Barrett (WI)
Bartlett
Barton
Bass
Bateman
Becerra
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berry
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boyd
Brady
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Burton
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Cardin
Carson
Castle
Chabot
Chambliss
Chenoweth
Christensen
Clay
Clayton
Clement
Clyburn
Coble
Coburn
Collins
Combest
Condit
Conyers
Cook
Cooksey
Costello
Cox
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (IL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeFazio
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Deutsch
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Doggett
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Emerson
Engel
English
Ensign
Eshoo
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Filner
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fowler
Fox
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Furse
Gallegly
Ganske
Gejdenson
Gekas
Gephardt
Gibbons
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
[[Page H7746]]
Goode
Goodlatte
Goodling
Gordon
Goss
Graham
Granger
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hall (TX)
Hamilton
Hansen
Harman
Hastert
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hefner
Herger
Hill
Hilleary
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Hooley
Horn
Hostettler
Houghton
Hulshof
Hutchinson
Hyde
Inglis
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kasich
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kim
Kind (WI)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
Kucinich
LaFalce
LaHood
Lampson
Lantos
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Linder
Lipinski
Livingston
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Lowey
Lucas
Luther
Maloney (CT)
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McDermott
McGovern
McHale
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meek
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (CA)
Miller (FL)
Minge
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Neal
Nethercutt
Neumann
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Nussle
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Parker
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Paxon
Payne
Pease
Pelosi
Peterson (MN)
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Portman
Poshard
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Riley
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roemer
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roukema
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Ryun
Sabo
Salmon
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sanford
Sawyer
Saxton
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Schumer
Scott
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Shadegg
Shaw
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Sisisky
Skeen
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (OR)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Smith, Linda
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Souder
Spence
Spratt
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Stokes
Stump
Stupak
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauscher
Tauzin
Taylor (MS)
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thompson
Thornberry
Thune
Thurman
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Traficant
Turner
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watt (NC)
Watts (OK)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Weller
Wexler
Weygand
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NOES--5
Green
Largent
Meehan
Scarborough
Strickland
NOT VOTING--20
Berman
Bonilla
Boucher
Brown (CA)
Buyer
DeGette
Dellums
Flake
Foglietta
Gonzalez
Gutierrez
Hastings (FL)
Hoyer
Hunter
Kennelly
Redmond
Schiff
Skaggs
Smith (MI)
Watkins
{time} 1301
Mr. BERRY changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
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.
personal explanation
Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 431. I was
detained presiding over a Budget Committee meeting on Social Security.
Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''
personal explanation
Mr. REDMOND. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 430 and 431 I was not
present. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' for both votes.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 238, I call up
the conference report on the bill (H.R. 2209) making appropriations for
the legislative branch for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1998,
and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bereuter). Pursuant to House Resolution
238, the conference report is considered as having been read.
(For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of
September 18, 1997, at page H7580.)
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York [Mr. Walsh] and
the gentleman from New York [Mr. Serrano] each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York [Mr. Walsh].
General Leave
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
and that I may include tabular and extraneous material on H.R. 2209.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to present today the conference report
on the fiscal year 1998 legislative branch appropriations bill, H.R.
2209. Before I proceed with my summary of the report, let me take a
brief moment to thank my colleague, the gentleman from New York [Mr.
Serrano] for his help throughout this process. The gentleman is a
friend and someone of the highest integrity. We would not be here today
without his tremendous leadership and skill.
My counterpart in the other body, Senator Bennett, was also very
helpful as we worked to achieve this conference report. I consider him
to be a person of the highest character.
Last, to the majority and minority staff members in both bodies,
their work is deeply appreciated. I speak for every Member of the House
in recognizing their contributions. Their hard work reflects the
dedication of all the employees in the Congress. As I said on this
floor several weeks ago, Members need to look around their work
environment every day and recognize those who work with us in this
legislative body. These are good people who serve with pride and
deserve our respect.
Mr. Speaker, to summarize the conference agreement, the agreement
appropriates $2.25 billion in the new budget authority to the Congress
and the support agencies and offices of the legislative branch. This
amount is approximately $146 million below the request of the
President, which is a 6.1 percent reduction over what the President
asked for.
The actual funding level for 1998 is about a 2-percent increase over
1997. This appropriation level is below the amount appropriated for
legislative branch in 1994 and 1995, so we are still below 1994's
level. So the downsizing program begun in the 104th Congress is still
intact.
The highlights of the conference report: Operations of the Senate are
$461 million, operations of the House are $708 million; joint items,
including Capitol police, et cetera, joint committees, $12.7 million;
Architect of the Capitol, $179 million. This includes the Botanic
Garden and the library buildings. Library of Congress, $346 million,
including Congressional Research Service; Congressional Budget Office,
just under $25 million. Office of Compliance, $2.5 million; Government
Printing Office is about $100 million, plus a transfer of $11 million
from the Government Printing Office revolving fund. General Accounting
Office, which received an increase this year, will be at about $347
million.
I will include a table showing details and a list of the highlights
of the conference agreement. It may be of some interest to compare the
conference agreement to the bill that passed the House on July 28.
As is customary, that bill did not contain funds for the operations
of the Senate. The House bill, without the Senate, was $1.711 billion.
For those same items, the conferees agreed to a level of $1.735
billion. The House came up about $24 million, the Senate came down
about $37 million, so the House conferees did well.
The result is an increase of just about $13.7 million over the
current year. That is an eight-tenths of 1 percent increase above 1997,
well below even the modest rate of inflation in the economy. In
addition, full-time equivalent positions have been reduced; in other
words, we have reduced staff again by about 200 jobs.
The adjustment to House-passed items agreed to includes: In the
conference the conferees added $8 million over the current level for
the General
[[Page H7747]]
Accounting Office. This level will allow price level adjustments in
travel, training, and begin a technology upgrade delayed the past 3
years. For the Architect, the roofing project at the library, an
additional $1.5 million, adjustments to electricity and fuel costs at
the Capitol powerplant, funds for the design of a new chiller system at
the powerplant, funds for staff of the Conservatory and for the Library
of Congress an additional $3.8 million to begin the $40 million
replacement of the Library's bibliography records and a $1.25 million
increase to begin a program to replace an additional 10,000 playback
machines for blind and physically handicapped readers.
Mr. Speaker, the other item of concern to the conferees was the
funding for the Joint Committee on Taxation. For Joint Committee on
Taxation, the conferees agreed to fund an increase of 2.5 FTE's. In
addition, the Senate agreed to remove from the bill the provision that
requires operational adjustment in their workload. Instead report
language was inserted in the joint explanatory statement that addresses
the problem to direct the Joint Tax Committee to be more responsive to
Members who are not in the committees of jurisdiction for taxation,
House Committee on Ways and Means, Senate Committee on Finance.
Mr. Speaker, several legislative matters were agreed to in
conference. Under the Capitol police, there is a provision providing
authority for the Capitol Police Board to establish a unified pay and
leave schedule for the police. For congressional printing, a
longstanding provision carried in the House bill on availability of
funds to pay printing costs has been retained.
There is language under the Library of Congress specifying the amount
available for the integrated library system project, along with report
language directing the Library to secure approval before obligating the
funds.
Two administrative provisions were added under the Library. One
establishes a revolving fund for reimbursable work at the Library. The
other permits the investment of Library gift funds in the same manner
as trust funds.
Under the Government Printing Office revolving fund, $1.5 million is
made available for management audit. Under title III of the bill, all
the provisions in the House-passed bill were retained. In addition, the
conferees agreed to a provision relating to Senate restaurant employees
and a provision which will allow cost of living allowances for senior
level staff in the Office of the Architect.
Three House housekeeping provisions were also added at the request of
Committee on House Oversight.
In summary, Mr. Speaker, the bill provides $2.2 billion for the
funding for the legislative branch. It is 6 percent below the request
of the President. FTE levels have been reduced by just over 200. The
bill retains a smaller legislative branch as established by the policy
set in the 104th Congress and provides stability to those operations
that must support our legislative needs. I urge the adoption of the
conference report.
Mr. Speaker, I include the following for the Record:
[[Page H7748]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH24SE97.000
[[Page H7749]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH24SE97.001
[[Page H7750]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH24SE97.002
[[Page H7751]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TH24SE97.003
[[Page H7752]]
Conference Agreement--Fiscal Year 1998 Legislative Appropriations, H.R.
2209
Total appropriation: $2.2 billion ($2,248,676,500); in
addition, $158,189,000 will be available from receipts and
reimbursements collected by the General Accounting Office and
Library of Congress.
Appropriations compared to budget request: A reduction of
$145.9 million ($145,883,500) under the amounts contained in
the President's budget.
Compared to fiscal year 1997: An increase of $45,795,300
above the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1997.
Highlights:
Operations of the Senate: $461,055,000 plus $52 million for
office building maintenance;
Operations of the House: $708,738,000 plus $36.6 million
for office building maintenance;
Joint items (Joint committees, Capitol police, guide
service, etc.): $12,656,500;
Architect of the Capitol: $127,224,000, including the
Botanic Garden;
Library of Congress: $346,424,000, including the
Congressional Research Service;
Congressional Budget Office: $24,797,000;
Office of Compliance: $2,479,000;
Government Printing Office: $99,729,000, plus a transfer of
$11,017,000 from the GPO revolving fund; and
General Accounting Office: $346,903,000 total funds
available, including $7,404,000 from offsetting collections.
Specific items:
The $24.6 million increase for House operations is
primarily for staff COLA's, employee benefits, and other
staff salary mandatory increases;
There is an additional $31.6 million for Senate operations
and buildings;
Several capitol budget projects are funded in the Capitol
buildings and grounds accounts under the Architect of the
Capitol:
Dome repair: $1,500,000; various improvements in House and
Senate chambers: $1,230,000; renovations to the canine
facility: $200,000; physical security: $625,000; design of
chiller plant: $1,000,000; additional fuel and electricity
costs: $1,700,000; vertical roof replacement, Thomas
Jefferson Building: $1,500,000; fire, safety, and
telecommunication improvements; and grounds and buildings
improvements for physically challenged staff and visitors:
$6.6 million; and $550,000 for cooling the Botanic Garden and
National Garden learning center.
For the General Accounting Office, the FY98 level is an
increase of $8,478,000 over FY 1997 and achieves a stable
resource base coming after the 25% reduction in FY 1996 and
FY 1997:
Funding for 3450 FTE's, an increase of 137 jobs over the
3313 currently on board; and funds are provided for increased
travel, training, technology upgrades, and incentive salary
payments.
For the Library of Congress, the funding for current
programs is maintained. In addition:
$5.6 million is provided for an integrated library system
(ILS) to replace outmoded bibliographic systems, the initial
stage of a multi-year $40 million project; an increase in the
number of replacement playback machines from 48,000 to 55,000
for use by blind and physically handicapped readers;
authorization for the cooperative acquisitions program which
provides assistance to research and academic libraries
throughout the U.S.; and authority to reinvest gift fund
receipts.
For the Joint Tax Committee, $5,818,500 is provided,
including funds for an additional 2.5 FTE's;
For the Government Printing Office, level funding is
provided including authority to transfer from the revolving
fund; and
A $1.5 million management audit of GPO will be conducted by
the General Accounting Office.
____
Fiscal Year 1998 Legislative Appropriations, H.R. 2209--Differences
Between Conference Agreement and House Adopted Bill
On July 28, 1997, the House passed H.R. 2209, the fiscal
year 1998 appropriations bill. The bill appropriated $1.7
billion ($1,711,417,000) for the salaries and expenses of the
House of Representatives, various joint items (Capitol
Police, Joint Committees, the Guide Service, etc.),
Congressional Budget Office, Office of Compliance, Architect
of the Capitol (excluding Senate office buildings), the
Library of Congress, Government Printing Office, and General
Accounting Office.
On July 29, 1997, the Senate passed H.R. 2209 after adding
funds for Senate operations and amending the items contained
in the House bill for other legislative agencies. That bill
totaled $2.3 billion ($2,283,746,000).
On September 17, the committee of conference reported an
agreement on H.R. 2209 which appropriates $2.2 billion
($2,248,676,500). In addition, $158 million in offsetting
receipts and reimbursements are authorized.
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN HOUSE BILL AND CONFERENCE AGREEMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conference
House bill agreement Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New items not contained in House bill due to
traditional House-Senate comity:
Senate and Senate office buildings.............. .................. $513,076,000 +$513,076,000
Senate items in Capitol buildings and grounds... .................. 500,000 +500,000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................................... .................. 513,576,000 +513,076,000
===========================================================
Comparable items contained in both House and Senate
bills:
House and House office buildings................ $745,919,000 745,348,000 -571,000
Joint items..................................... 86,802,000 86,710,500 -91,500
Office of Compliance............................ 2,479,000 2,479,000 ..................
Congressional Budget Office..................... 24,797,000 24,797,000 ..................
Architect of the Capitol (excl. office 85,694,000 90,114,000 +4,420,000
buildings).....................................
Library of Congress (incl. CRS)................. 342,290,000 346,424,000 +4,134,000
Government Printing Office...................... 99,916,000 99,729,000 -187,000
General Accounting Office....................... 323,520,000 339,499,000 +15,979,000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................................... $1,711,417,000 $1,735,100,500 \1\ +23,683,500
===========================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Plus 1.4 percent.
The conferees added funds to the House bill in three
programs: The Architect of the Capitol, the Library of
Congress, and the General Accounting Office.
Architect of the Capitol:
The conferees added $4.4 million above the House bill.
Primarily, the increase was for high priority projects that
cannot be delayed:
$775,000 for additional fuel costs at the power plant
necessitated by the conversion of the 2 coal-fires burners to
natural gas. The need for this conversion was identified
after consideration of the House bill when the Architect was
notified by local authorities that power plant emissions are
exceeding legal standards;
$1,500,000 was added to finish the roofing replacement at
the Thomas Jefferson Building. The additional funds will be
used to augment the current work underway so that the
vertical copper components of the roof are included in the
job;
$1,000,000 was added for the design of the chiller
replacements necessary at the east refrigeration plant.
Replacement units are needed because the chlrofluorocarbon
coolant is no longer available and will require an extensive
replacement project; and
The balance of the increase, $1,145,000, includes several
small projects and funds for the Conservatory staff who will
be needed during the Conservatory renovation project.
Library of Congress:
The conferees added $4.1 million above the House bill, for
two essential items:
$3.8 million was added for the integrated library system
project, which will replace the currently outmoded
bibliographic records. This project is ready for bid and the
General Accounting Office is monitoring progress. Delaying
this project will result in added costs to the $40 million
now estimated, and will reduce or stretch out the savings and
benefits expected; and
$625,000 was added to accelerate a replacement program for
playback machines being used by blind and physically
handicapped users of the Library's talking book collections.
General Accounting Office:
The conferees added $16 million to the House bill in order
to stabilize the GAO program. GAO has been downsized by 25
percent in funding in two years and 33 percent in staff over
a three year period. The conferees have provided an $8
million increase over 1997 ($16 million above the House bill)
to cover the ``mandatory'' increase necessary for the COLA's
and related employee benefits for the remaining 3,450 FTE's.
There should be sufficient funds for additional training,
travel (much of GAO's work is done in the field), technology
upgrades, and incentive salary payments which have been
curtailed for several years.
[[Page H7753]]
____
Fiscal Year 1998 Legislative Appropriations, H.R. 2209--Differences
Between Conference Agreement and Enacted Amounts for Fiscal Year 1997
On July 28, 1997, the House passed H.R. 2209, the FY 1998
appropriations bill. The bill appropriated $1.7 billion
($1,711,417,000) for the salaries and expenses of the House
of Representatives, various joint items (Capitol police,
joint committees, the guide service, etc.), Congressional
Budget Office, Office of Compliance, Architect of the Capitol
(excluding Senate office buildings), the Library of Congress,
Government Printing Office, and General Accounting Office.
On July 29, 1997, the Senate passed H.R. 2209 after adding
funds for Senate operations and amending the items contained
in the House bill for other legislative agencies. That bill
totaled $2.3 billion ($2,283,746,000).
On September 17, the committee of conference reported an
agreement on H.R. 2209 which provides appropriates $2.2
billion ($2,248,676,500).
CHANGES BETWEEN HOUSE-CONSIDERED ITEMS IN THE FISCAL YEAR 1997 AMOUNTS AND FISCAL YEAR 1998 CONFERENCE AGREEMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enacted fiscal Conference
1997 agreement Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New items not contained in House bill due to
traditional House-Senate comity:
Senate and Senate office buildings.............. $481,498,000 $513,076,000 $+31,578,000
Senate items within Capitol buildings and 350,000 500,000 +150,000
grounds........................................
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................................... 481,848,000 513,576,000 +31,728,000
===========================================================
Comparable items contained in both House and Senate
bills:
House and House office buildings................ 716,654,200 745,348,000 +28,693,800
Joint items..................................... 88,581,000 86,710,500 -1,870,500
Office of Compliance............................ 2,609,000 2,479,000 -130,000
Congressional Budget Office..................... 24,532,000 24,797,000 +265,000
Architect of the Capitol........................ 113,633,000 90,114,000 -23,519,000
Library of Congress (incl CRS).................. 331,758,000 346,424,000 +14,666,000
Government Printing Office...................... 110,746,000 99,729,000 -11,017,000
General Accounting Office....................... 332,520,000 339,499,000 +6,979,000
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal.................................... 1,721,033,200 1,735,100,500 \1\ +14,067,300
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Plus 0.8 percent.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the conference report on H.R. 2209,
the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act for 1998. This has not been
an easy year for this bill, but the gentleman from New York, Chairman
Walsh, has worked exceptionally hard to keep the bill moving and to
forge a decent compromise in conference. He deserves great praise for
his work, and I personally also wanted to thank the gentleman for the
way he has treated me with dignity and respect and our staff.
Mr. Speaker, it is our responsibility on this subcommittee to provide
the people's branch of our Government with the resources needed to
carry out our legislative and oversight functions effectively, although
some in this House do not seem to understand that. We must also
consider the health and safety of all who work in and visit the Capitol
complex and the physical integrity of this Capitol building and the
other historic structures on our campus. Again, we sometimes run into
the problem of some Members do not seem to care about that. There are
necessary investments that still cannot be made within the spending
limits of this bill. However, on balance the conferees have moved the
bill in the right direction.
For the House alone, the conference report is about $25 million, or
3.6 percent, above fiscal year 1997, which is not an unreasonable
increase.
{time} 1315
Not counting Senate items, the conference report totals not quite $14
million, or less than 1 percent above fiscal year 1997. Levels in the
conference report are modestly increased from the House bill for the
Architect of the Capitol and the Library of Congress. The biggest
difference between the House bill and the conference report is in GAO,
which would receive the funding necessary to stabilize its staffing
after 2 years of major downsizing.
I should also mention the Joint Committee on Taxation. Some have
characterized House Democrats' efforts to reduce a requested increase
of 12 staff positions, or 20 percent, for Joint Committee on Taxation
for the year after the historic tax bill as partisan. Let me point out
that Senators are, at least, as dissatisfied with JCT, and, at least,
as insistent on reining it in as we are.
The concerns about the committee's role in making tax policy, its
chief of staff, remember, acknowledged that tobacco lobbyists wrote the
secret tobacco tax break that surfaced in the bill, and its
responsiveness to Members are completely bipartisan. Indeed, the
chairman of the Senate subcommittee was harshly critical of the Joint
Committee on Taxation in conference. He was the author of bill language
that would have cut the JCT increase to 1 staff position and required
JCT to use that position to assist Members who are not on the Tax
Committees.
In conference, the Senate gave in on this bill language, but pressed
very hard for compromise report language found on page 26 of the
conference report that puts joint tax on notice with the following:
That both House and Senate Members expect timely and responsive
assistance with revenue estimates, regardless of the committees they
sit on; the conferees will monitor the committee's responsiveness, and,
if improvements are not evident, the conferees may take statutory
action next year.
So, we see the frustrations are real and held on both sides of the
aisle and on both sides of the dome. The leadership of the Tax
Committee should take note of this.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I support this conference report and urge my
colleagues to support it so we can get the bill enacted before the
start of fiscal year 1998 next week.
Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak out against an
increase in pay for Members of Congress.
The Federal Government is still spending more than it takes in.
Despite the fact that we have passed the historic balanced budget bill
which will balance the budget by 2002, until that date, we are still
adding to the national debt that we will pass onto the next generation
of Americans. I believe to allow a pay raise for Members of Congress at
this point in time is not the responsible thing to do.
Congress should not be increasing its pay while we have such a large
national debt, especially when we are adding to that debt every day.
This is one reason I am cosponsoring H.R. 632, the Balance the Budget
First Act of 1997, introduced by Congressman Jon Christensen. This
legislation not only repeals the automatic pay increase for Members of
Congress, but it also expresses the sense of the Congress that pay of
Members of Congress should not be increased until the Federal budget
has been balanced.
I appreciate that under current law, the pay increase for Members of
Congress is tied to the pay increase for the Federal Judiciary. That is
why I am an original cosponsor of H.R. 2517, introduced by my colleague
from Alabama, Congressman Bob Riley. This legislation, like H.R. 632,
would eliminate the automatic pay increase only for Members of
Congress, not for Members of the Federal Judiciary.
I hope that we will have the good sense to listen to the American
people and prevent this pay increase for Members of Congress.
Mr. SERRANO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WALSH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bereuter). Without objection, the
previous question is ordered on the conference report.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the conference report.
Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XV, the yeas and nays are ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 309,
nays 106, not voting 18, as follows:
[[Page H7754]]
[Roll No. 432]
YEAS--309
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Aderholt
Allen
Andrews
Archer
Bachus
Baesler
Baker
Baldacci
Ballenger
Barrett (NE)
Bartlett
Bass
Bateman
Bentsen
Bereuter
Berman
Bilbray
Bishop
Blagojevich
Bliley
Blumenauer
Boehlert
Boehner
Bonior
Bono
Borski
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd
Brown (CA)
Brown (FL)
Brown (OH)
Burton
Buyer
Callahan
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Canady
Cannon
Capps
Cardin
Castle
Chambliss
Christensen
Clay
Clayton
Collins
Combest
Cook
Cooksey
Coyne
Cramer
Crane
Crapo
Cubin
Cummings
Cunningham
Danner
Davis (FL)
Davis (VA)
Deal
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
DeLay
Dellums
Diaz-Balart
Dickey
Dicks
Dingell
Dixon
Dooley
Doolittle
Doyle
Dreier
Duncan
Dunn
Edwards
Ehlers
Ehrlich
Engel
English
Etheridge
Evans
Everett
Ewing
Farr
Fattah
Fawell
Fazio
Filner
Foley
Forbes
Ford
Fowler
Frank (MA)
Franks (NJ)
Frelinghuysen
Frost
Furse
Gallegly
Ganske
Gekas
Gephardt
Gilchrest
Gillmor
Gilman
Goodlatte
Gordon
Goss
Granger
Greenwood
Gutknecht
Hall (OH)
Hamilton
Hansen
Hastert
Hefner
Herger
Hilliard
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holden
Horn
Houghton
Hoyer
Hyde
Istook
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Jenkins
John
Johnson (CT)
Johnson (WI)
Johnson, Sam
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kelly
Kennedy (MA)
Kennedy (RI)
Kennelly
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kim
King (NY)
Kingston
Kleczka
Klink
Klug
Knollenberg
Kolbe
LaFalce
LaHood
Lantos
Latham
LaTourette
Lazio
Leach
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
Livingston
Lowey
Lucas
Maloney (NY)
Manton
Manzullo
Markey
Martinez
Mascara
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McCrery
McDade
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McInnis
McIntosh
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinney
McNulty
Meehan
Meek
Menendez
Metcalf
Mica
Millender-McDonald
Miller (FL)
Mink
Moakley
Mollohan
Moran (VA)
Morella
Murtha
Nadler
Neal
Nethercutt
Ney
Northup
Norwood
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Oxley
Packard
Pallone
Pappas
Pascrell
Pastor
Paxon
Payne
Pelosi
Peterson (PA)
Petri
Pickering
Pickett
Pitts
Pombo
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Quinn
Rahall
Rangel
Redmond
Regula
Reyes
Riggs
Rivers
Rodriguez
Rogan
Rogers
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Ryun
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sandlin
Sawyer
Saxton
Scott
Serrano
Sessions
Shaw
Shuster
Sisisky
Skaggs
Skeen
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith, Adam
Snowbarger
Snyder
Solomon
Spence
Stokes
Sununu
Talent
Tanner
Tauzin
Taylor (NC)
Thomas
Thornberry
Thune
Tiahrt
Tierney
Torres
Towns
Upton
Velazquez
Vento
Visclosky
Walsh
Wamp
Waters
Watt (NC)
Waxman
Weldon (FL)
Weldon (PA)
Wexler
Weygand
White
Whitfield
Wicker
Wise
Wolf
Woolsey
Wynn
Yates
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
NAYS--106
Barcia
Barr
Barrett (WI)
Barton
Becerra
Berry
Bilirakis
Blunt
Brady
Bryant
Bunning
Burr
Carson
Chabot
Chenoweth
Clement
Clyburn
Coburn
Condit
Conyers
Costello
Cox
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
Deutsch
Doggett
Ensign
Eshoo
Fox
Gejdenson
Gibbons
Goode
Goodling
Green
Gutierrez
Hall (TX)
Harman
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Hefley
Hill
Hilleary
Hooley
Hostettler
Hulshof
Hutchinson
Johnson, E. B.
Jones
Kind (WI)
Kucinich
Lampson
Largent
Lewis (KY)
LoBiondo
Lofgren
Luther
Maloney (CT)
McHale
Miller (CA)
Minge
Moran (KS)
Myrick
Neumann
Nussle
Paul
Pease
Poshard
Radanovich
Ramstad
Riley
Roemer
Roukema
Royce
Rush
Salmon
Sanford
Scarborough
Schaefer, Dan
Schaffer, Bob
Schumer
Sensenbrenner
Shadegg
Shays
Sherman
Shimkus
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (MI)
Smith, Linda
Souder
Stabenow
Stark
Stearns
Stenholm
Strickland
Stump
Stupak
Tauscher
Taylor (MS)
Thompson
Thurman
Traficant
Turner
Watkins
Watts (OK)
Weller
NOT VOTING--18
Armey
Bonilla
Coble
Emerson
Flake
Foglietta
Gonzalez
Graham
Hastings (FL)
Hunter
Inglis
Kasich
Parker
Peterson (MN)
Portman
Schiff
Smith (OR)
Spratt
{time} 1341
Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mrs. MYRICK, Mrs. TAUSCHER, and Messrs. BRYANT, DAVIS
of Illinois, RILEY, SKELTON, GIBBONS, and HILLEARY, Ms. EDDY BERNICE
JOHNSON of Texas, Ms. ESHOO, and Messrs. COX of California, BARR of
Georgia, LAMPSON, SMITH of Michigan, FOX of Pennsylvania, CLEMENT, and
HAYWORTH changed their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
So the conference report was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________