[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 105 (Thursday, July 22, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H6296-H6297]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




MAKING IN ORDER ON JULY 27, 1999, OR ANY DAY THEREAFTER, CONSIDERATION 
 OF H.J. RES. 57 DISAPPROVING EXTENSION OF NONDISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT 
               TO PRODUCTS OF PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order 
at any time on July 27, 1999, or any day thereafter, to consider in the 
House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 57) disapproving the extension of 
nondiscriminatory treatment (normal trade relations treatment) to the 
products of the People's Republic of China; that the joint resolution 
be considered as read for amendment; that all points of order against 
the joint resolution and against its consideration be waived; that the 
joint resolution be debatable for 3 hours equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means in 
opposition to the joint resolution, and a Member in support of the 
joint resolution; that pursuant to sections 152 and 153 of the Trade 
Act of 1974, the previous question be considered as ordered on the 
joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion; and that 
the provisions of sections 152 and 153 of the Trade Act of 1974 shall 
not otherwise apply to any joint resolution disapproving the extension 
of most-favored-nation treatment to the People's Republic of China for 
the remainder of the first session of the 106th Congress.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Petri). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from California?
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, could the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) clarify the intent of this 
unanimous consent regarding the distribution of debatable time?
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. PELOSI. Further reserving the right to object, I yield to the 
gentleman from California.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, it is the intention for us to proceed, 
recognizing that there are Members of the Committee on Ways and Means 
who both support and oppose this resolution, with an equal division of 
debate so that Members on both sides of this issue will have an equal 
opportunity to participate in this, and we are looking forward to a 
very interesting, fascinating, full, vigorous 3 hours of debate on this 
issue.
  Ms. PELOSI. Further seeking clarification, when the gentleman says 
recognizing that Members of the Committee on Ways and Means in both 
parties agree or disagree on this, does that

[[Page H6297]]

mean that only a Member of the Committee on Ways and Means of the 
majority or minority party can control the time?
  Mr. DREIER. It is not our intention to make that decision as far as 
recognition. It will be up to the Chair. Again, there are Members of 
both the majority and the minority on the Committee on Ways and Means 
who are on both sides of this question, but it is clear that another 
Member could be recognized. In fact, the author of the resolution of 
disapproval is not, in fact, a Member of the Committee on Ways and 
Means, and it is quite possible that he could be recognized.
  Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for his clarification.
  Mr. DREIER. I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and would encourage 
acceptance of my unanimous consent request and again look forward to a 
vigorous debate.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________