[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 149 (Thursday, September 18, 2008)]
[House]
[Pages H8452-H8454]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. BLUNT. I yield to my friend, the majority leader, to give us an 
update on what we intend to do next week.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the whip for yielding.
  On Monday, the House will meet at 10:30 a.m. for morning hour and 12 
p.m. for legislative business, with votes postponed until 6:30 p.m.
  On Tuesday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for morning hour and 10 
a.m. for legislative business.
  On Wednesday and Thursday, Mr. Speaker, the House will meet at 10 
a.m. for legislative business.
  On Friday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business.
  We will consider several bills under suspension of the rules. The 
complete list of suspension bills will be announced by close of 
business tomorrow. We will also consider H.R. 5244, the Credit 
Cardholders' Bill of Rights Act of 2008; the fiscal year 2009 
Department of Defense Authorization Act; and a continuing resolution 
for fiscal year 2009.
  In addition, we will consider any bills we get back from the Senate, 
including an energy tax extender bill, the alternative minimum tax 
bill, and the mental health parity bill.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman.
  On the Department of Defense Authorization Act, would that be a 
conference report we'd expect?
  Mr. HOYER. We're hopeful. As you know, the Senate has passed it but 
has not, as I understand it, agreed to go to conference. So we may have 
to just have an informal conference, as I call them, or others call it 
ping-ponging. In other words, I think Mr. Skelton and Mr. Levin and the 
ranking members are working to see whether they can agree on a form of 
the bill that would then pass from here again to them, and they would 
then pass it finally. It's effectively a conference, but the Senate has 
not gone to conference. So we can't very well have a conference report 
if the Senate doesn't go to conference. But both Mr. Skelton and Mr. 
Levin and I believe the ranking members as well want to get the 
reauthorization bill done.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that. I am tempted to go into 
the whole topic of the informal conference. It's so frustrating to all 
of us.
  Mr. HOYER. I know you have time constraints that would dictate 
against that.
  Mr. BLUNT. This may very well be the last time, certainly before the 
election, we have a chance to talk about the work we get done in the 
next few days, and so I do have some questions, and I won't go there, 
but I would like to see us get that Defense authorization bill done. I 
do think it's a shame that we can't do that in an appropriate 
conference and go through the regular process.
  Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLUNT. I yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I share his angst about not getting this bill done. As you 
know, I gave Mr. Skelton on May 18 of this year to do that bill. The 
committee brought the bill out on May 18. We passed the bill. It's been 
in the Senate ever since, and I think we both share a concern that that 
hasn't been done, but of course, as you know, the Senate just passed it 
a few days ago, yesterday as a matter of fact.
  Mr. BLUNT. I thank the gentleman for that.
  On your indication the House will and of course has to consider some 
way to continue funding the government with the fiscal year ending at 
the end of this month and no appropriation bills passed up until now, 
we would be considering a continuing resolution next week. Does the 
gentleman have a sense of whether that would be a continuing resolution 
with other items on it and what any of those other items might be?
  I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I expect it to be a continuing resolution as opposed to an omnibus, 
an omnibus, of course, being the cumulative bills put into a very large 
bill. I don't expect that to be the case. I expect it to be a CR, but I 
do expect to have additional items on that continuing resolution. The 
extent of that has not yet been determined. There's a lot of 
discussion, as I'm sure you're well aware

[[Page H8453]]

of discussion on your side as well, about things that people would like 
to have on the bill.
  In addition, there are discussions between the White House and the 
Appropriations Committee, Mr. Obey and Mr. Nussle, the OMB director. I 
have had discussions with the White House about items, some are called 
anomalies, that is, things that otherwise would have been done if we 
had done the regular bills, that the White House believes need to be 
done. There are a number of things that are being discussed of that 
kind.
  In addition, we're going to have discussions about anything that we 
may need to do in the short term with reference to the extraordinary 
calamity that has confronted our economy. Whether anything addressing 
that will be in the CR or not is unclear at this point in time, but 
that's a possibility.
  So I tell the gentleman, it will not be an omnibus in the sense that 
you and I understand an omnibus and the body understands an omnibus. 
For the most part, we will probably be looking at spending being at 
last year's levels for most of the items that we're talking about.
  Mr. BLUNT. The House has, I guess, passed one of the 12 
appropriations bills. Would the gentleman anticipate that any other 
bills in addition to that one might be included in the continuing 
resolution, and if so, which ones might we be looking at?
  Mr. HOYER. It is possible, but I think given the time frame that 
there is some concern about the time it will take to consider more 
lengthy pieces of legislation would impede getting the CR done. So that 
there may not be full bills, as I indicated. Obviously we do want to 
ensure funding of the government. We want to continue further 
operations of the government, both on the national defense side and the 
national security side, homeland security side, as well as all other 
departments of government.
  At this point in time, I really can't answer that question, but I can 
tell you that my belief is at this point in time that we would be 
largely dealing with bills at last year's level.
  Mr. BLUNT. Would the gentleman anticipate that we would be dealing 
with the continued funding of the government again in this session of 
Congress? In other words, would the time frame be mid-November or do 
you anticipate a time frame well into next year?
  I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. I think mid-November is obviously an option. There have 
been discussions, as you know, on timing with the White House. I don't 
know whether you know, but I've had discussions with the White House on 
timing. I think they're relatively flexible on timing. Nobody has said 
this time or that time. There is obviously a wide variety of dates 
being discussed, mid-November being one. The Speaker and I, and I think 
Senator Reid has also expressed himself on this issue, but the Speaker 
and I are hoping that we would do a February date or even a March 1 
date, so there would be some clarity in where we're going, whoever is 
elected President.
  The date, though, is still obviously not resolved. We will have to 
discuss that with the White House and see what we can get through the 
House and the Senate, but November is obviously a possibility.
  I will tell the gentleman we will be back here. I hope my office has 
had these discussions with you. But we're looking at, as we usually do, 
the week before Thanksgiving, about a week-and-a-half, 10 days after 
the election, the week of the 17th as the date when we would come back 
and organize, which would also be a week available for session if it 
was needed.
  I might also add, if I could, further, that we had discussions today 
and we're all very, very concerned, and you and I are going to be 
meeting on it later tonight, very concerned with the economic 
conditions that confront our Nation at this point in time. So we are 
going to be ready to come back in October, if necessary, depending upon 
what discussions we have and what, hopefully together, in a bipartisan 
way, we believe needs to be done to respond to the crisis.
  Mr. BLUNT. I'm grateful to have that potential to be back in October, 
and we have very few scheduled work days from the 1st of August to the 
end of the year, but clearly this economic situation we're in could 
very well bring us back.
  The gentleman mentioned that list of--we call them here anomalies, 
but they're really the things that wouldn't necessarily be part of or 
perhaps should be part of a straight extension of funding. I know one 
of those on the energy front that's been discussed a lot would be the 
moratorium on using money to begin the process of leasing and 
exploration on either the Outer Continental Shelf or the so-called oil 
shale moratorium in the West. Does the gentleman have a sense of 
whether those moratoriums would be included in the CR or, as the 
administration has asked, that they not be included in the CR?
  I would yield.

                              {time}  1745

  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  We've had discussions about this. As I said at my press conference on 
Tuesday, there have been no discussions about including that moratoria 
in a CR. I want to make it clear; there haven't been discussions about 
it that we won't or we will. My expectation is, though, we passed a 
bill, we think it is a good bill, we think it opens up drilling. And 
there will be some discussions both on the Senate side--we don't know 
what the Senate side is going to do with it--and with the White House 
on that issue.
  We've had pretty open discussions with the White House on this issue. 
I know there's been a letter signed by a large number on your side 
about that issue. The White House is obviously sensitive to that, but I 
don't think that's going to be a stumbling block.
  Mr. BLUNT. If it's not there, it won't be a stumbling block for our 
side, based on the letters you've seen and other things. That's for 
sure.
  Tomorrow, at one point we were believing that some issues could be 
included in what was being called an economic stimulus package could be 
on the floor. That's not happening now. Would you see some of those 
issues also as likely things that might be added to the continuing 
resolution?
  I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. Those are some of the items that, yes, as I said, could 
well be added to the CR. We're going to have discussions. I'm going to 
have discussions with your side--with you, in particular--on this 
issue.
  Again, I think there's nobody who wants to shut down government. And 
there's nobody, frankly, that doesn't want to make sure--for instance, 
let me give you an example: Unemployment insurance. We're very 
concerned about people who are going to be running out of their 
unemployment insurance. If we're not here, we want to make sure that 
there is authorization for the dollars--that are available, obviously--
to be spent for extension benefits for people that run out because they 
can't find employment in the context in which we are now finding 
ourselves. So yes, that is possible.
  Mr. BLUNT. I would say, just to clarify on that topic, what they 
would be running out of would be the end of the first 13-week extension 
on top of the normal unemployment.
  Mr. HOYER. That's correct.
  Mr. BLUNT. So the unemployment fund would not be running out of 
money----
  Mr. HOYER. That's correct. You would have to authorize the additional 
13 weeks.
  Mr. BLUNT. But the people who already used one extension, that 
extension we agreed to 9 or so weeks ago would reach its 13-week 
conclusion is what the gentleman is discussing?
  Mr. HOYER. Yes, sir. We won't be here on that particular date, or 
week, and therefore, we might have to make accommodations for that.
  There are other things, obviously, that we have talked about that we 
are having concerns about: creating jobs, providing for jobs in our 
economy. We're doing a lot of investing in, some would say ``bailing 
out'' companies that had a whole lot of assets, but now we have people 
who don't have a whole lot of assets, have lost their home and who are 
facing heating bills that are spiking up very seriously, facing a tough 
time buying groceries because grocery prices have spiked, and they may 
be out of a job.
  There are a number of issues that we are concerned about. We have 
been faced with Lehman Brothers and AIG

[[Page H8454]]

and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But there are a lot of little people 
who are having equal problems for them, and we want to make sure that 
we address them, and I know you do as well.
  Mr. BLUNT. On that list of things we discussed, I don't know that we 
have specifically discussed it, but some kind of redefining the 
previously authorized loans to auto companies could be in that effort 
of things we look at on the CR?
  I would yield.
  Mr. HOYER. Redefining, as much as both clarifying what is available, 
and funding.
  As you know, we authorized, in the 2007 bill, $25 billion in 
guarantees for modernization to comply with more efficient automobiles, 
which we believe is a very important aspect of becoming energy 
independent, reducing the demand for petroleum products. And, yes, that 
may well be there as well. Hopefully we can get agreement with the 
administration, your side, and our side on what that ought to be.
  Mr. BLUNT. The only specific question I had from a Member right 
before we started was whether or not, in the suspensions for next week, 
the Great Lakes Compact could be included in that. I think we sent that 
message over that I might be asking about that.
  Mr. HOYER. It's possible. I'm smiling because----
  Mr. BLUNT. I was hoping for a little more definition than that.
  Mr. HOYER. I understand that, and I'm sure you would like that. I'm 
smiling because every time I walk on the floor I have at least 50 
Members who ask me if it's possible that a suspension bill will be on 
the Suspension Calendar next week. We're working to try to get a 
workable list that both sides can agree with and we can facilitate the 
passing of policies that are not controversial, but just need time to 
get done. And so I say it's certainly possible.
  Mr. BLUNT. On that issue, it's my understanding, at least, that 
Chairman Oberstar and the Great Lakes delegation is substantially in 
favor of that. Hopefully that has removed whatever obstacle that we've 
been dealing with with that issue.
  And I yield back.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman.

                          ____________________