[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 25 (Thursday, February 14, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H966-H968]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
QUESTION OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause
1 of rule IX, I rise to a question of personal privilege.
[[Page H967]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has been made aware of a valid
basis for the gentleman's point of personal privilege.
The gentleman from Florida is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Madam Speaker, it is with great
regret, but I must rise today for a question of personal privilege. An
article appeared today, Madam Speaker, on the Web site of a publication
called The Politico reprinting a statement by a spokesperson for the
majority leader of this House describing actions of mine as
``incomprehensible'' and ``unjustifiable'' and insinuating that I
purposely brought disrespect to the House and to the memory of my dear
friend and colleague, Congressman Tom Lantos.
It was not my actions which were incomprehensible or unjustifiable,
Madam Speaker, but rather the actions of the majority which deprived
all Members of this House the opportunity to debate or even consider or
vote on the contempt resolutions brought to the floor today by the
majority in an absolutely totally unprecedented fashion.
The majority knows that the rule we considered earlier is totally and
absolutely unprecedented. Its sole purpose was to prevent us from even
debating or voting on these contempt resolutions. And further, the
majority denied us the opportunity to take up the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act amendments passed by the Senate, which we feel very
strongly are in the supreme national interest of the United States.
The majority knew that the minority was strongly of the belief that
the only options available to us were procedural votes. The majority
knew that we intended to utilize our procedural options to register our
displeasure with this uncalled-for process.
We purposely refrained from all procedural motions during the opening
moments of the session today precisely to show respect for our friend
and departed colleague.
We were assured by the majority that we would not begin consideration
of the rule, in other words, that the House would not reconvene until
11:30 a.m. or the conclusion of Mr. Lantos' memorial service.
Tom Lantos, Madam Speaker, was an extraordinary man, a great man, and
he was my friend. It was an honor for me to be present today at his
memorial service in Statuary Hall. I was suddenly summoned out of the
memorial service for my friend Mr. Lantos to perform my
responsibilities as a member of the Rules Committee, to manage the rule
for the minority side for the contempt resolutions. The majority had
decided to resume the session during the memorial service.
Madam Speaker, I am a member of the minority. Neither I nor my
leadership control when the House convenes. What we saw today was an
uncalled-for effort by the majority to force the minority to give up
our rights to protest a process we feel is blatantly unfair.
The majority's decision to reconvene the House interrupted the
tribute to my good friend Mr. Lantos. It is the majority that decides
when to convene the House. It is the majority that chose to convene the
House even though many speakers remained to speak in the memorial for
Mr. Lantos.
I was told by my good friend Mr. Dreier that he does not recall any
memorial being interrupted by a House session, and he has been here
more years than I have. I have been here 15, and obviously I don't
recall any either.
Madam Speaker, the statement attacking me today by a spokesperson for
the majority leader was totally uncalled for and unacceptable.
I yield such time as he may consume to the ranking member of the
Rules Committee, the gentleman from California.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. And we
have all come to the conclusion that this has been a very sad day in
many ways. Of course, the saddest part of it was the loss of our dear
friend and colleague, Tom Lantos.
I would simply like to say that Mr. Diaz-Balart had the
responsibility of serving as the floor manager for a rule that was, as
he said in his very thoughtful statement, unprecedented. And we had a
debate on that rule, and this House chose to do something it had never
done before, pass a rule which took two contempt resolutions and
adopted them. That was a decision of the House. And I think it was an
unfortunate one.
Mr. Diaz-Balart had a responsibility to stand up for this
institution. He and I stood together at that service, heard from
colleagues of ours and heard from many other distinguished people who
remembered the life of Tom Lantos.
{time} 1515
We were stunned when all of a sudden the bells rang and the House was
going to reconvene in the middle of this memorial service.
Now, members of the majority staff, Madam Speaker, had been informed,
had been informed, of exactly what it was that we in the minority were
going to do. If the House reconvened and we proceeded with
consideration of this special rule, we had informed the members of the
majority staff that we were going to call for a vote.
So Mr. Diaz-Balart was simply working to, under very, very, very
challenging, and, again, from my perspective, unprecedented
circumstances, where I had never before seen the House of
Representatives convened during a memorial service being held in
Statuary Hall, but under those circumstances, Mr. Diaz-Balart had the
responsibility to fulfill his duties, not to the Republican Members,
but to do what he believed to be right, and I agree with him,
obviously, in upholding the rights of this institution. So for any
Member, any Member or anyone outside to malign Mr. Diaz-Balart for
simply doing his job under very difficult circumstances is not right.
Let me conclude by simply saying that Mr. Diaz-Balart is one of those
Members who we all know is a fighter for freedom and has been
throughout his entire life. In many respects, Lincoln Diaz-Balart is
very similar to Tom Lantos.
Madam Speaker, I will say that it is a tragic irony that as we are
remembering the life of Tom Lantos that a Member like Lincoln Diaz-
Balart would in any way be maligned for his work on behalf of the
struggle for freedom and democracy and the liberation of people all
over this world.
Mr. BLUNT. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from
Missouri.
Mr. BLUNT. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I would say, of course, we come to the floor today with lots of
disappointment on what we are failing to do today. We think we should
stay until we get other matters done. But on this issue that relates to
the activities of the day, first of all, I was at the memorial service,
as many of you were. I was privileged to be there. Frankly, there are
very few Members of Congress, in the history of the Congress, that
could have, on the very short notice that we would have this sad
service today, would have the Foreign Minister of Israel, the Secretary
of State, the head of the United Nations, the Speaker of the House
present. It was an impressive service, and I hate that we are having
this debate around any lack of respect for that service.
On the other hand, the only work we had to do today was 1 hour of
debate on a rule that would then also replace the debate. One hour of
debate. The service was scheduled to last from 10 o'clock until 11:30.
It turned out it lasted until 11:50. But it was scheduled to last from
10 o'clock until 11:30.
When at 10:45 the majority decides we are going to start the 1 hour
of work we have to do today at 11, the majority should expect the other
side to complain. If in fact Mr. Diaz-Balart had not had his objection,
50 minutes of that 1-hour debate would have gone before I ever walked
out of the memorial service. The vote lasted 50 minutes, or
thereabouts. Apparently, Members couldn't even get in to vote for 50
minutes, let alone to get in to participate in the debate.
Of course, we should have said, let's not start the debate on the
only work we are doing today while we are passing up the work on the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. We are voting to talk about how
you can kill rats in the technical correction to the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. That is the only debate we
were going to have during 50 minutes of the
[[Page H968]]
1 hour of the memorial service. And of course Lincoln Diaz-Balart or
somebody should have stepped up to stop that, and thank goodness he
did.
I am really sad that a service we should have all agreed on would be
the priority of the morning, we couldn't manage for that to be the
priority of the morning. We had to start the 1 hour of work we had to
do 50 minutes before that service turned out to end and 30 minutes
before it was scheduled to end.
I am regretful that my good friend had to rise to this moment of
personal privilege, but I certainly support him in seeking this
privilege and hope that the Members of the House will understand what
happened here and appreciate the great respect we all have for Tom
Lantos.
Mr. HOYER. Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. I yield to the gentleman from
Maryland.
Mr. HOYER. I rise, as I have a couple of times in the past, to simply
say that I think on our side, obviously, we believed that we needed to
move forward on the work. All of us, however, share what has been said
about Tom Lantos, for whom we had the greatest respect, and we all
share a sadness at his loss.
I regret that the actions that precipitated this hour that you are
taking have occurred. They have occurred. We can't change them. Having
said that, I want to say that I understand the point the gentleman is
making, and I understand the point my friend Mr. Blunt has made. I
think it will suffice to say that. But I can appreciate the position
the gentleman found himself in and that Mr. Blunt and his leadership
found themselves in.
Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Thank you.
Madam Speaker, I utilized the opportunity of the rules to rise to a
question of personal privilege due to the statements attributed in the
press that I mentioned before to a spokesperson, which I stated and
restated I believe were totally uncalled for and unacceptable.
I thank all of you for having listened to me with such courtesy. It
is for someone who arrived as a 4-year-old refugee with his family
fleeing oppression, an extraordinary moment in the midst of the sadness
of the day, and the offense that I felt, it is an extraordinary moment
to be able to rise and invoke the rules of the House to seek the
attention of the representatives of this extraordinary Nation. So I
thank each and every one of you for your patience and your courtesy.
At this point, after thanking Mr. Dreier, thanking Mr. Blunt, and
thanking the majority leader for their kind words, I simply end
remembering a friend who everyone in this room can agree enriched our
lives. My son mentioned the other day this week when we were talking
about the sad news, he said, Dad, do you remember when I was a little
kid and you wanted me to get my posture up, what you would tell me? I
will never forget, he told me. Lantos. Your posture. That is one of the
first things that impressed me about Tom Lantos, even before I learned
about his zealous extraordinary commitment to the oppressed everywhere
where people are still longing to be free.
So let us all then end this recollection of what I believe was a very
unfortunate moment remembering someone who we can all agree was
extraordinary, enriched our lives, and was a great Member of Congress
and a great American. Thank you all very much.
____________________