[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 130 (Friday, September 25, 1998)]
[House]
[Page H8805]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




      MAKING IN ORDER LIMITED DEBATE AND POSTPONEMENT OF FURTHER 
        CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4579, TAXPAYER RELIEF ACT OF 1998

  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during 
consideration of H.R. 4579, pursuant to House Resolution 552, 
notwithstanding the order of the previous question, it may be in order 
after 30 minutes of the 60 minutes provided for initial debate on the 
bill, as amended pursuant to the rule, for the Chair then to postpone 
further consideration of the bill until the following legislative day, 
on which consideration may resume at a time designated by the Speaker.
  The intent is that we would do 30 minutes of debate on the tax bill 
tonight, then rise, and after a Journal vote tomorrow morning take up 
the remaining 30 minutes of general debate time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I will not 
object, but I would like to take this time to ask my friend, why is it 
that he only requested 30 minutes when there is a total of 2 hours 
debate on this bill?
  In view of the fact that so many Members would want to return to 
their home districts, especially this time of the political year, it 
would seem to me that if we started debate now, we could be out of here 
by 9 o'clock this evening. I am wondering, why are we just debating for 
30 minutes? Why can we not just take up the bill and move on from 
there?
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. RANGEL. Further reserving the right to object, I yield to the 
gentleman from New York.
  Mr. SOLOMON. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman knows, this was agreed to 
by the Republican and the Democrat leadership. We have to make sure the 
appropriators are going to get our work done. It is very, very 
difficult. We will go along with this.
  Mr. RANGEL. I am glad that the gentleman gave that lengthy 
explanation there, because I thought for a minute he did not have any 
reason why we were doing this, but now he has cleared that all up.
  Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Snowbarger). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________