[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 27 (Thursday, March 4, 2004)]
[House]
[Pages H842-H843]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of the
majority leader the schedule for the week to come.
Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, the House will convene on Tuesday at 12:30
for morning hour debates and 2 p.m. for legislative business. We will
consider several measures under suspension of the rules, and a final
list of those bills will be sent to Members' offices by the end of the
week. Any votes called on these measures will be rolled until 6:30 p.m.
On Wednesday, the House will convene at 10 a.m. We plan to consider
H.R. 339, the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act. In
addition, we plan to consider H.R. 3717, the Broadcast Decency
Enforcement Act.
Finally, I would like to remind all Members that we do not plan to
have votes next Friday, March 12. I will be happy to answer any
questions that the gentleman from Maryland has.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that information,
and also for planning purposes that assurance for March 12.
We talked last week and we know that the highway reauthorization
extension for 2 months was worked out. When can we expect the
committees to mark up the reauthorization bill, and when do you expect
to see it on the floor.
Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I
believe the gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) is in the process of
working with the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), the ranking
member, and members of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure to develop a product that can move through this House
before the Easter recess and be signed into law as quickly as possible.
So if we back away from our Easter recess, I would hope that the
committee would, within the next couple of weeks, be marking up a bill
so we can get it to the floor before the Easter recess.
{time} 1300
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that answer. Can the leader tell
me whether or not there is an expectation that this will be, as we have
had in the past, a 6-year reauthorization, or is it possible that there
would be a shorter reauthorization, say, of 2 years, obviously focused
on trying to build jobs and create jobs in the country?
Mr. DeLAY. It is a jobs bill, a very important jobs bill to all of us
here in the House. We want to do what we can to create these jobs and
get them going as fast as possible. To answer the gentleman's question
about whether it is a 2-year bill, a 6-year bill, what is the amount
here or there, I am not advised, quite frankly. There are discussions
about all of that. I do not think any decision has been made along
those lines. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) and the
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) are still discussing that, but I am
sure they soon will come to some sort of understanding as to how we
will proceed.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. As we, as well, also discussed last
week, can the leader bring us up to date on the progress of the budget
resolution and when he expects it to be marked up in committee and when
we can expect to have that bill on the floor?
Mr. DeLAY. It is my understanding after a lot of discussion that
Chairman Nussle and his Budget Committee members are working furiously
to complete all their hearings and be prepared to mark it up possibly
as early as next week. I would imagine moving the budget resolution to
the floor the week after the committee reports its resolution out of
the committee.
Mr. HOYER. I know this is preliminary and it is early, but my
presumption would be that as we did in years past, that the minority
would have its rights to submit such substitutes as it deemed
appropriate?
Mr. DeLAY. I am encouraging the minority to present substitutes so
that we can have a very healthy debate about the future of this country
and how we would as a House decide that the importance of the budget is
such that we can come to some sort of agreement as a House to move a
budget along.
Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, if I may say, somewhat, I know,
facetiously, but we are pleased that the leader is encouraging us to do
so. As a matter of fact, we are as pleased about that as we were last
year when the gentleman from Texas urged everybody to support our
motion to instruct, that we follow the House Democratic substitute as
opposed to the one that we actually passed. So we are encouraged by the
gentleman's encouragement.
Last, if I can, the FSC bill. We talked about this last week.
Obviously, the Europeans have started to impose some penalties. Can the
gentleman tell us the status of legislation to deal with the FSC issue?
Mr. DeLAY. As the gentleman knows, the Committee on Ways and Means
has reported a bill out, H.R. 2896, the American Jobs Creation Act.
This was reported last year. But we continue to work with the committee
and the other body and the administration to bring that bill to the
floor in a form that not only meets our obligations to the WTO but also
ensures the
[[Page H843]]
continued competitive position of all U.S. companies. I anticipate that
we will bring such a bill to the floor in the very near future.
Mr. HOYER. I presume, as well, that when and if that is brought to
the floor, because there has been some real disagreement on who that
bill ought to advantage and focus on as the gentleman knows in terms of
domestic manufacturers as opposed to manufacturers who do a lot of work
overseas, and hopefully we will be able to offer alternatives to
certainly the bill that was reported out last year, if it is the same
bill. As the gentleman knows, we would have an alternative to that. Can
the leader give us assurance that we will have that option?
Mr. DeLAY. The gentleman knows that it is the tradition of the House
to keep Ways and Means tax bills very tight. We have always as a
tradition discouraged amendments, but we have encouraged substitutes. I
cannot speak for the Committee on Rules; but if there are alternatives
in the form of substitutes, then they will be taken into consideration.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for that observation. One additional
observation. That is obviously an important option. I think the
gentleman states correctly the practice of the House under both
Democrats and Republicans.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. HOYER. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. If I could ask the gentleman from Texas,
I like to keep up with new trends in the House. I was struck when the
gentleman from Texas, the majority leader, said he could not speak for
the Rules Committee.
Is that a new development we had not previously known about?
Mr. DeLAY. That tradition remains the same, I would say to my friend
from Massachusetts.
Mr. HOYER. I thought of that question, Mr. Leader, but I thought it
was probably not worth asking because I knew the answer. But to the
other question, with respect to offering substitutes, very frankly,
what happens is you can offer a substitute, but if it is not germane
and you do not receive a waiver when you are granted the right to offer
the substitute, obviously on the one hand you have the ability to offer
a substitute, but you do not really have the ability to offer an
alternative. There is a very substantial difference.
I do not necessarily expect an answer today, but I really would hope,
because we are talking about very significant, important issues, where
there are differences in a bipartisan fashion on either alternative,
that alternatives should be allowed that are consistent with the
objective, although, as the leader well knows, from time to time
because of what is or is not included in the committee product may or
may not be germane even though it is pointed to the subject. I offer
that as food for thought because I think it is fair and I think it
would be good for the American public to have a broader spectrum of
options than is sometimes allowed to us, notwithstanding the fact that
theoretically a substitute is made available.
I think the gentleman understands my point, and I thank the gentleman
for the information.
____________________