[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 155 (Friday, November 7, 1997)]
[House]
[Page H10318]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS, FISCAL YEAR 1998
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of
today, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 101) making further
continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1998, and for other
purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
The text of the joint resolution is as follows:
H.J. Res. 101
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section
106(3) of Public Law 105-46 is further amended by striking
``November 7, 1997'' and inserting in lieu thereof ``November
9, 1997'', and each provision amended by sections 122 and 123
of such public law shall be applied as if ``November 9,
1997'' was substituted for ``October 23, 1997''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of today,
the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston] and the gentleman from
Wisconsin [Mr. Obey] each will control 30 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Livingston].
General Leave
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks on House Joint Resolution 101 and that I may include tabular
and extraneous material.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Louisiana?
There was no objection.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
(Mr. LIVINGSTON asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, the second fiscal year 1998 continuing
resolution expires tonight. Currently, 7 of the 13 appropriations bills
have been enacted into law and two others are pending at the White
House. We have just adopted the conference report on the Labor-HHS
bill, leaving three appropriations bills left to finish in the House.
Because these remaining bills will not be enacted into law by tonight,
it is necessary now to proceed with an extension of the current short-
term continuing resolution so that the Government can continue to
operate.
The joint resolution now before the House merely extends the
provisions of the initial continuing resolution until November 9, or
for 2 more days, while we wrap up our work. The basic funding rate
would continue to be the current rate. We retain the provisions that
lower or restrict those current rates that might be at too high a level
and would therefore impinge on final funding levels. Also, the
traditional restrictions such as no new starts and 1997 terms and
conditions are retained. The expiration date of November 9 should give
us time to complete our work.
Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the joint resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I frankly have misgivings and mixed feelings about this
continuing resolution. People who know me know that I have a black
Irish soul and that I often worry about the downside of life, but even
I, until 2 days ago, was very optimistic that we would be able to get
out of here with all of our work done on the appropriation bills
without the need for a continuing resolution. Indeed, up until 2 days
ago, I think we were on that track.
{time} 1900
But then something happened, because all of a sudden the flexibility
which we thought we saw on the part of that side of the aisle and this
side of the aisle all of a sudden seemed to disappear, and now we have
heard disturbing rumors about the linkage of fast track legislation
with the remaining appropriation bills. And I must say that I find it
disconcerting to go into a conference on the State-Justice-Commerce
appropriation bill today and to discover that the conferees are being
told that they must begin the conference without knowing what the
language is that we will be asked to vote on issues such as the census,
for instance.
Now, I happen to be in a peculiar position. I have supported the
Republican Party position on the issue of sampling on the census, but
it is apparent to me that there is a deal or near deal between the
Republican leadership and the White House on that language, and yet
rank-and-file Members on neither side of the aisle have so far been
given access to whatever that language is.
Now, regardless of one's position on the issue, Members have a right
to know what it is, and it seems to me that we would not have this CR
before us if games were not being played. We were, in fact, told that
one Member of the leadership today indicated that the language on the
census could not be made public until the vote on fast track because it
would, quote, cost votes on fast track.
Now, I do not know which side of the aisle is likely to be sold out
on that issue, whether it is our side of the aisle or their side of the
aisle, but somebody apparently is, and it seems to me that what is
happening is very simple. These other appropriation bills are being
stalled out in terms of our getting any full information until fast
track votes have been achieved.
Now, that greatly complicates the appropriations process, it greatly
adds to the mistrust in this place, and it is, in my view, the only
reason why we even have this CR before us tonight. The issues on
appropriation bills were easily resolvable before they became linked to
the fast track train, and it just seems to me that rank-and-file
Members need to know that we are in the position of needing yet another
CR not because of any failure of the Committee on Appropriations to do
its work, or certainly not because of any failure of the chairman of
the Committee on Appropriations, or to see to it that these
appropriations bills are done, but simply because people at higher
levels are linking things that ought not be linked, and, as a result,
this committee once again is prevented from doing its business in a
timely fashion.
I find that very much regrettable and very much not in the public
interest, and I am tempted to call a roll call on this because of that,
but in the interests of accommodating the Members who would finally
like to get out of here, and get a decent meal, and get some sleep, I
will withhold. But I do not think Members ought to be fooled. There is
very clearly linkage that certain parties are trying to establish on
these issues, and I think that is unfortunate because it gets in the
way of our ability to deal with these bills straight up and on the
square.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, is the gentleman from Wisconsin prepared
to yield back the balance of his time?
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. LIVINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, in the interests of staff throughout the
House and my own desire to end this long week and engage in further
discussions on additional bills tomorrow, I have no further requests
for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Pursuant to the order of
the House today, the joint resolution is considered read for amendment.
Pursuant to the order of the House today, the previous question is
ordered.
The question is on engrossment and third reading of the joint
resolution.
The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third
time, and was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to
reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________