[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 145 (Thursday, October 16, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H9585-H9586]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 2030
LIMITATION ON CERTAIN AMENDMENTS DURING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF H.R.
3289, EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT FOR DEFENSE AND FOR THE
RECONSTRUCTION OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN, 2004
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
during further consideration of H.R. 3289 in the Committee of the Whole
pursuant to House Resolution 396, before consideration of any other
amendment, except pro forma amendments by the chairman or ranking
minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or their designees
for the purpose of debate, it shall be in order to consider the
following amendments:
An amendment by Mr. Shadegg; an amendment by Mr. Goode; an amendment
by Mr. Kirk; an amendment by Mr. Filner; an amendment by Mr. Spratt; an
amendment by Mr. Markey; an amendment by Mr. Holt; an amendment by Mr.
Waxman; an amendment by Ms. Slaughter; an amendment by Mrs. Maloney; an
amendment by Mr. Blumenauer, an amendment by Ms. Loretta Sanchez of
California.
Each such amendment may be offered only by a Member designated or a
designee, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 10
minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an
opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject
to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the
Committee of the Whole. An amendment may amend a portion of the bill
not yet read, except that an amendment proposing to transfer
appropriations among objects in the bill must conform to clause 2(f) of
rule XXI.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I would simply
say to the House, I do not even know what the content of most of these
amendments is, but what is going on here is that the staff has been
attempting to work out understandings under which a huge number of
amendments can be disposed of in the most efficient way possible.
As I understand it, there are approximately 39 pending amendments
which are probably in order and about 69 that are not, and those
numbers may be off a little bit but they are not bad for government
work at 8:30 in the middle of a Red Sox game. But having said that,
what this represents is that the sponsors of these amendments have
agreed--all but two of these amendments as I understand it are in
order, and those amendments, the sponsors have agreed to a severe time
limit in order to have them considered. And in the case of the two
amendments offered by persons who did not have germane amendments, my
understanding is that those Members have agreed to drop all of their
other amendments in return for a 5-minute consideration for their
amendment before the point of order is lodged.
I think that is roughly what it is that we are agreeing to, if this
is, in fact, agreed to by the body. So it is simply an attempt to try
to take a huge universe of amendments and to create some smaller,
manageable universes so that we can move the process along.
Let me say that, without even knowing the content of these
amendments, I have strong feelings about the fact that Members are
being reduced to having important issues on something like this
considered in such a reduced time frame, but that is the choice we have
under the rule that we have been given, and so we can either try to
extend Members opportunities as much as possible or not, and that is
what we have been trying to do.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, as usual the gentleman understands
the process well and has explained it well, and that is certainly our
intent, to offer every Member every legitimate amendment.
For those that are subject to a point of order, we will raise the
point of order, but we believe that Members should have the opportunity
to debate the important issues, and at the same time, we would like to
get finished sometime this week so that we can go to conference with
the other body as soon as possible.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, first I would
inform the gentleman from Wisconsin that it is the Yankees as well as
the Red Sox game.
Secondly, I would ask the distinguished gentleman, the distinguished
chairman, there are a number of Members who desire at some point
tonight to strike the last word, and if we agree to this unanimous
consent request, would that preclude an opportunity at
[[Page H9586]]
some point tonight of striking the last word?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. NADLER. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, striking the last word will be in
order, but I would urge our colleagues, we had 6 hours of debate under
a special ruling of the House. We had another hour of debate on the
rule. We had another hour of debate under general debate on the bill
itself. We have had a lot of debate. However, if Members feel inclined
to prolong the debate even further beyond those many hours already
concluded, that would be in order.
Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I would point out that some Members would be
interested in doing that after the last vote tonight, but as long as it
will be in order.
Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object,
if I might, my question is to the chairman.
What is the status of the other amendments? I appreciate the desire
to move forward on this compromise, this unanimous consent. There are
other amendments that are equally in order, and what is the position on
those amendments?
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, this unanimous consent that we
have propounded at this point, like the one earlier today, would have
no prejudice on any other amendment that may be offered following these
11 amendments. So this does not affect anyone's right to offer their
amendment that they intend to offer. It is just a matter of trying to
get some cohesive organization of how we are going to proceed to
conclude this bill.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, these amendments simply represent negotiations
that we have been able to reach with the sponsors of the amendments.
Negotiations are still going on with the other sponsors of the other
amendments, and as those are resolved, the hope is to have other
packages to bring before the House.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished
gentleman for his comments.
Since this is a place of speech and debate, I would hope that we take
our responsibility seriously.
Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
____________________