[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 151 (Wednesday, October 21, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2305]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     CONFUSING BANKRUPTCY PROVISION

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, October 21, 1998

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, as ranking member of the Judiciary 
Committee, I want to elucidate on the meaning of an isolated and 
confusing bankruptcy provision which unfortunately appeared in the 
omnibus appropriations bill approved by the House yesterday. Section 
603 of Division I of the bill, entitled Chemical Weapons Convention 
should have originally been referred to the Judiciary Committee for 
action and study. As the Speaker is aware, bankruptcy legislation is 
quite complex and requires scrutiny of Members who are familiar with 
the impact of proposed amendments.
  Most importantly, this legislation should not be read to expand the 
exceptions to the automatic stay to cases where governmental units are 
merely seeking to exercise control of a debtor's property to satisfy 
debt. I believe that the provisions should be read to restrict the 
exception to the automatic stay to circumstances where a governmental 
unit is enforcing its police or regulatory power, but not acting to 
collect a debt or other financial obligations. This interpretation is 
consistent with Chairman Hyde's reading of the language, which is 
reflected in a statement inserted in the Congressional Record on his 
behalf by International Relations Committee Chairman Gilman subsequent 
to previous Congressional consideration of this legislation. See 143 
Cong. Rec. H 10951 (Nov. 13, 1997).
  I am also concerned that by repealing Sec. 362(b)(4) and 
Sec. 362(b)(5) of the automatic stay, some may assert that governmental 
units may now be required to seek relief from stay in order to enforce 
their pales for regulatory powers in all cases, except in the instance 
when the governmental units' activities involves action under the 
Convention in connection with chemical weapons. I do not believe that 
this new requirement was intended, nor would it be desirable.

                          ____________________