[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 153 (Wednesday, November 5, 1997)]
[House]
[Page H10102]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




REQUEST TO REDUCE TIME FOR ELECTRONIC VOTING ON RESOLUTIONS OFFERED AS 
              QUESTION OF PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE ON TODAY

  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that any remaining 
resolutions offered today as a question of the privileges of the House 
be considered as read and that the minimum time for electronic voting 
on any question arising with respect to consideration of such a 
resolution may be reduced to 2 minutes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kingston). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Texas?
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, is that my 
understanding that, therefore, there would be no debate on the 
individual privileged resolution that a Member who has submitted them 
in a timely fashion would have an opportunity to have a debate based on 
the unanimous-consent request?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. If a motion to table is offered before 
debate begins, that would be correct, and the resolution would not be 
debatable.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, continuing my reservation, my 
understanding of the unanimous-consent request is that they be voted 
and that there be a dispensation of the reading. The question is 
whether or not there would be an opportunity to debate what an 
individual Member has presented in their privileged resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. It would depend on whether a motion to table 
were offered at the outset.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, further reserving my right to object, can 
the parliamentarian through the Speaker tell me whether privileged 
resolutions, whether individuals have been denied the right to speak on 
a privileged resolution that they have offered before the House in 
previous Congresses?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot respond to place events in 
historical context.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, based upon the fact that it certainly 
seems like a gag rule, and as far as I know it is unprecedented to go 
ahead and stop a Member from pursuing a privileged resolution, I would 
have to object to the request.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.

                          ____________________