[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 18 (Wednesday, February 27, 2002)]
[House]
[Pages H601-H602]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 REQUEST TO MAKE IN ORDER AMENDMENT NUMBER 3 AS AMENDMENT TO THE BILL 
   DURING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1-542, INTERNET FREEDOM AND 
                    BROADBAND DEPLOYMENT ACT OF 2001

  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further 
consideration in the Committee of the Whole of the bill, H.R. 1542, 
pursuant to House Resolution 350, that the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Buyer) be permitted to offer amendment No. 3 printed in House Report 
107-361 as an amendment to the bill, as amended.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Louisiana?
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, since the 
Buyer-Towns amendment was an amendment to an amendment not made in 
order, and the committee has now risen, I would ask of the chairman of 
the Committee on Energy and Commerce to explain to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Towns) and me what he intends to do.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BUYER. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.
  Mr. TAUZIN. Apparently, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and 
the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon) have decided in the Committee of 
the Whole not to offer their amendment, and since the amendment drafted 
by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Buyer) and the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Towns) is an amendment to their amendment, I must seek 
unanimous consent to have it offered as an amendment to the main bill 
in the Committee of the Whole, and that is why I have asked for this 
unanimous consent request.
  Absent the granting of this unanimous consent request, it is my 
understanding the only way that we can get the Buyer-Towns amendment up 
would be if we defeated the previous question on the motion to 
recommit, in which case we will do so, if we are not granted this 
unanimous consent.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, I am 
hopeful that no one does object.
  Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Louisiana?
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object in order to 
make this point to Members, which is that we have reached a juncture 
here whereby two amendments, the one made by

[[Page H602]]

the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Cannon) and the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Conyers), and the one made by the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Buyer) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns), each have a right, 
in my opinion, to have a vote on the House floor.
  The way the rule is structured is there will not be a vote on the 
Cannon-Conyers amendment. What we are trying to do through this device 
is to have a straight up or down vote on the amendment, which all the 
competing companies in America want to have as their up or down vote; 
and then everyone is free to vote with the Bells or all the 
competitors. One vote, that is all they want; pick sides, straight up 
or down. We are not allowed that under the rule that came out of the 
committee last night.
  So that is all we are trying to set up right now. We hope by the end 
of this process, and on the vote on the previous question, by the way, 
Members will have that chance to decide, one way or another, to come 
down forever on competition or with this old monopolistic view.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MARKEY. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I 
concur with his observation.
  Mr. Speaker, could I just make this point: Why can we not just have a 
straight up or down vote on Cannon-Conyers and on Buyer-Towns? That has 
been spoken about among our leadership. I think it would be agreeable 
to many of the principals here on this bill, and I think it would make 
things move a lot more quickly.
  We have already saved ourselves hours of time by foreclosing the 
debate. If we just have these two votes, we would be able to bring this 
very important piece of legislation to a conclusion.
  Mr. MARKEY. Mr. Speaker, I object.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is heard.

                          ____________________