[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 164 (Sunday, December 18, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H12176-H12178]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(a) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO 
                  CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS

  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I 
call up House Resolution 632 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 632

       Resolved, That the requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII 
     for a two-thirds vote to consider a report from the Committee 
     on Rules on the same day it is presented to the House is 
     waived with respect to any resolution reported on the 
     legislative day of Sunday, December 18, 2005.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida, (Mr. Putnam) is 
recognized for 1 hour.

[[Page H12177]]

  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Matsui), 
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During 
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose 
of debate only.
  (Mr. PUTNAM asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 632 is a same-day rule that 
waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII, which requires a two-thirds vote to 
consider a rule on the same day it is reported from the Rules Committee 
against certain resolutions reported from the Rules Committee. It 
applies the waiver to any special rule reported on the legislative day 
of December 18, 2005.
  H. Res. 632 allows the House to consider a rule and underlying 
legislation that may be reported today.
  Mr. Speaker, it is imperative that we pass this same-day rule. This 
resolution will lay the foundation for the House to complete its 
business and send outstanding legislation to the Senate and eventually 
the President for his signature. We are working to move the process 
along towards adjournment of the first session of the 109th Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this same-day rule so we 
can move forward to serious consideration of the remaining legislation 
for which we are staying here and working through the weekend to 
complete.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume.
  (Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, today we consider H. Res. 632, a martial-law 
rule allowing the House to bring bills to the floor on the same day 
that the Rules Committee meets to report that bill.
  But significantly, the martial-law rule does not specify which bills 
may be brought up. Instead, it is a blank check for the majority party 
to bring up virtually any bill in Congress up until the speaker gavels 
this legislative day to a close.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a highly unusual procedure. I would like to take 
a moment to explain to the American people exactly how out of the 
ordinary it is.
  This is the first time that a totally open-ended blanket martial-law 
rule has been brought to the House floor. Every other rare use of this 
procedure has specified at least a category of legislation. This rule 
is unprecedented for the power it grants the majority.
  Mr. Speaker, some Members may argue that the blanket nature of this 
rule allows them to conduct business efficiently by allowing them to 
bring up the first thing that is ready to pass.
  I, however, take a different view. This will tarnish the honor of 
this institution by restricting the democratic process. It will allow 
bills to come up with absolutely no prior notice to Members. Members 
may not have time to examine what is in the bill. They may not have 
even heard of the bill before.
  There is a risk that last-minute language could be written 
incorrectly, or that it could have unintended consequences. There is 
the risk that controversial provisions could be inserted without proper 
review.
  And by not giving Members this review time, we will be forced to 
simply hope that this did not occur. Mr. Speaker, I believe that 
Members need more of a guarantee than that before we cast our votes.
  Mr. Speaker, such a harsh rule impedes the democratic process. It did 
not have to be that way. The House leadership chose not to conduct 
floor business on Friday of last week, or on Monday of this week. This 
type of schedule has been commonplace all year long.
  So I must conclude that we are here not out of necessity, but because 
the Republican leadership is unable to govern. Once again, it seems as 
though the majority cannot be trusted with conducting the business of 
the American people in an open manner.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this blanket martial-law rule. Members 
should have adequate time to review bills before they vote for them.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, the gentlewoman is correct when she 
characterizes this as an unusual time. It is almost 2 o'clock on a 
Sunday afternoon and the Congress is in session. These are very unusual 
times as we approach the end of this first session of the 109th 
Congress. I do not think anybody would dispute that. I certainly know 
that our wives and husbands and families who are scattered around the 
country manning Christmas parties and Christmas pageants as single 
parents while we are here doing the people's business over the weekend 
would agree that these are highly unusual times.
  I would note that this same-day rule has passed the committee two 
times on a voice vote, and these concerns were not elevated to the 
point of even demanding a role call vote.
  These are unusual times, I would certainly agree. And in order for us 
to bring this unusual session that has been marked by cataclysmic 
events throughout our country which were unforeseen, this unusual 
session that has seen an unusually productive legislative agenda pass 
both the House and the Senate and be signed into the law by the 
President, as we mark the end of this year and do everything we can to 
pass the legislation that will directly benefit our troops, both at 
home and abroad through the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, 
as we do everything we can in an unusual way on a Sunday night and 
probably into the wee hours of Monday morning, to do everything we can 
to guarantee that our friends and neighbors on the gulf coast in 
Louisiana and Mississippi and Alabama and south Florida who were hit by 
Katrina and Rita and Wilma will have the relief that has been promised 
them and that is so important as so many of them struggle to bring 
their lives back together, yes, we will continue to operate in this 
unusual scenario on a Sunday afternoon and Sunday night to do our job, 
to finish the work that is on our plate.
  The House has very successfully moved its appropriations legislation 
in a very timely manner. But, frankly, while we finished prior to the 
July 4 recess, Katrina hit during the August recess. Wilma and Rita hit 
after that. So while we were following the regular order that both 
sides of the aisle should be very proud of, both sides of the aisle 
should be very appreciative of our hardworking appropriators who made 
that happen, it all went out the window when you get hit by a category 
5 and then another category 5 and then another category 4 while we were 
on August recess alone.
  So certain unusual factors have impacted this unusual year, which 
lead us to the unusual situation of being here on a Sunday passing a 
same-day rule so that we can move forward on the important items that 
remain.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I think it is important for the American 
people to know that under martial law, anything can be brought up and 
put into any bill; and it will take weeks, months or longer before many 
people even understand what happened.
  But I want to demonstrate a knowledge of one thing that every Member 
of Congress must be aware of, that the Defense appropriations bill has 
folded into it a provision which will permit drilling in the Arctic 
National Wildlife Refuge. Every Member of Congress must be aware of 
that. No one can say after it happens that they did not know. And 
according to all news reports up to this moment, it is the intention of 
the majority to put that provision into the Defense appropriations 
bill.
  It is a very interesting admission. Drilling for oil is linked to our 
warfighting capabilities. If we do not drill for more oil in this 
refuge, perhaps we can, instead, explore our peacemaking capabilities. 
There is no question that our presence in Iraq was, in part, linked to 
a quest for domination of oil resources. I mean, let us be frank. The 
first objective, when our troops went in, they were told by their 
leaders in the administration to get control of the Iraqi oil ministry. 
Everyone remembers that. And Americans remember, too, the high oil 
prices that this country has suffered in the last year.

[[Page H12178]]

  Now, let me ask each Member of Congress, is there any connection 
between high oil prices and the growing monopolies within the energy 
industry? The fewer oil companies we have it seems the prices keep 
going up and up.
  Now, what are the oil companies afraid of? They are afraid of 
alternative energy. They are afraid of energy from the sun, from wind, 
geothermal, biomass, green hydrogen, because the oil companies know 
that it will cut into their profits. So, naturally, the oil companies 
want to keep on drilling. They so badly want to keep on drilling that 
they are going to drill in Alaska, or in the Arctic National Wildlife 
Refuge, if the Defense appropriations bill passes.
  Every American should know that that is not going to mean lower oil 
prices; it is going to mean higher oil prices because it will once 
again show the domination of the oil companies on our political 
process.
  We could talk about our economy, and we should. High oil prices are 
bad for our economy. Is that not a message that we should be going 
towards alternative energy? Reliance on nonrenewable resources 
inevitably will lead to war. Is that not an argument for renewable 
energy? Is that not an argument for breaking up the energy monopolies? 
Oil companies do not want alternative energy. They want us to keep on 
drilling. They want to grab access to oil whether it is in Iraq or ANWR 
or anywhere else.

                              {time}  1400

  Wherever we are depending on more oil, they get more profits.
  This is a time for us to take a direction towards conservation. In 
that way I consider myself a conservative. Waste not, want not. It is 
time for us to take a stand for protection of the environment. The 
administration has spurned any efforts to cause America to join with 
the world community in signing the Kyoto Climate Change Treaty, and at 
the same time we see billions of dollars wasted because of the 
tremendous suffering that has been caused in our gulf coast region, but 
I would say that we have wasted the gulf coast region because we did 
not have an alternative energy policy years ago. We act like there is 
no connection between climate change and our energy consumption 
patterns.
  Wake up, America. Understand that all these things are interrelated, 
that we are interdependent and interconnected, that the choices we make 
today on our energy policy will echo through the years as to the 
direction the country will go in.
  It is time for us to take a stand today for the protection of human 
rights. The Gwich'in Tribe is this humble tribe that depends on the 
porcupine caribou for its subsistence, and drilling in that Alaskan 
refuge is going to destroy the calving grounds of the porcupine 
caribou.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, while I would love to engage the gentleman 
in his theory that big oil companies caused Hurricane Katrina on the 
rule about consideration of legislation on the same legislative day, I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say that I urge my 
colleagues to reject this blanket martial-law rule. Members should have 
adequate time to review the bills before they vote for them.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PUTNAM. Mr. Speaker, these are unusual times as we struggle 
through the important deliberations of this Congress to make sure that 
our troops are cared for through the Department of Defense 
appropriations process and that our gulf coast friends and neighbors 
receive the assistance that they need and have been promised and are 
owed by their countrymen in the wake of the devastation wrought by 
these hurricanes.
  This rule lays the foundation for us to move that important 
legislation in a timely way. And martial law around the world means 
troops on the streets, tanks on the streets, the military setting 
mandatory curfews where people cannot act in a free and virtuous way.
  Only in America would the opportunity for 535 elected representatives 
to come from around the country to haggle and debate and fight and 
compromise over ways to help their fellow countrymen and move forward 
with an agenda for liberty and prosperity and security, only in America 
do we take for granted our liberties such that we would call such a 
process ``martial law.''
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, I yield back the 
balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Latham). The question is on the 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________