[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 6, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H6-H20]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           RULES OF THE HOUSE

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution and ask for 
its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                               H. Res. 5

       Resolved, That the Rules of the House of Representatives of 
     the One Hundred Tenth Congress, including applicable 
     provisions of law or concurrent resolution that constituted 
     rules of the House at the end of the One Hundred Tenth 
     Congress, are adopted as the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives of the One Hundred Eleventh Congress, with 
     amendments to the standing rules as provided in section 2, 
     and with other orders as provided in sections 3, 4, and 5.

     SEC. 2. CHANGES TO THE STANDING RULES.

       (a) Inspector General Audits.--Amend clause 6(c)(1) of rule 
     II to read as follows:
       ``(1) provide audit, investigative, and advisory services 
     to the House and joint entities in a manner consistent with 
     government-wide standards;''.
       (b) Homeland Security.--In clause 3(g) of rule X, designate 
     the existing text as subparagraph (1) and add thereafter the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(2) In addition, the committee shall review and study on 
     a primary and continuing basis all Government activities, 
     programs, and organizations related to homeland security that 
     fall within its primary legislative jurisdiction.''.
       (c) Additional Functions of the Committee on House 
     Administration.--In clause 4(d)(1) of rule X--
       (1) redesignate subdivisions (B) and (C) as subdivisions 
     (C) and (D) and insert after subdivision (A) the following 
     new subdivision:

[[Page H7]]

       ``(B) oversee the management of services provided to the 
     House by the Architect of the Capitol, except those services 
     that lie within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
     Transportation and Infrastructure under clause 1(r);''; and
       (2) in subdivision (D) (as redesignated) strike ``(B)'' and 
     insert ``(C)''.
       (d) Terms of Committee Chairmen.--In clause 5 of rule X--
       (1) amend paragraph (a)(2)(C) to read as follows:
       ``(C) A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner may 
     exceed the limitation of subdivision (B) if elected to serve 
     a second consecutive Congress as the chair or a second 
     consecutive Congress as the ranking minority member.''; and
       (2) in paragraph (c)--
       (A) strike the designation of subparagraph (1); and
       (B) strike subparagraph (2).
       (e) Calendar Wednesday.--
       (1) In clause 6 of rule XV--
       (A) in paragraph (a)--
       (i) strike ``the committees'' and insert ``those 
     committees''; and
       (ii) strike ``unless two-thirds'' and all that follows and 
     insert ``whose chair, or other member authorized by the 
     committee, has announced to the House a request for such call 
     on the preceding legislative day.''; and
       (B) strike paragraphs (c), (d), and (f) (and redesignate 
     paragraph (e) as paragraph (c)).
       (2) In clause 6(c) of rule XIII, strike subparagraph (1) 
     and the designation ``(2)''.
       (f) Postponement Authority.--In clause 1 of rule XIX, add 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), when the previous 
     question is operating to adoption or passage of a measure 
     pursuant to a special order of business, the Chair may 
     postpone further consideration of such measure in the House 
     to such time as may be designated by the Speaker.''.
       (g) Instructions in the Motion to Recommit.--In clause 2(b) 
     of rule XIX--
       (1) designate the existing sentence as subparagraph (1);
       (2) in subparagraph (1) (as so designated)--
       (A) strike ``if''; and
       (B) strike ``includes instructions, it''; and
       (3) add the following new subparagraph at the end:
       ``(2) A motion to recommit a bill or joint resolution may 
     include instructions only in the form of a direction to 
     report an amendment or amendments back to the House 
     forthwith.''.
       (h) Conduct of Votes.--In clause 2(a) of rule XX, strike 
     ``A record vote by electronic device shall not be held open 
     for the sole purpose of reversing the outcome of such 
     vote.''.
       (i) General Appropriation Conference Reports.--In clause 9 
     of rule XXI--
       (1) insert after paragraph (a) the following new paragraph 
     (and redesignate succeeding paragraphs accordingly):
       ``(b) It shall not be in order to consider a conference 
     report to accompany a regular general appropriation bill 
     unless the joint explanatory statement prepared by the 
     managers on the part of the House and the managers on the 
     part of the Senate includes--
       ``(1) a list of congressional earmarks, limited tax 
     benefits, and limited tariff benefits in the conference 
     report or joint statement (and the name of any Member, 
     Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or Senator who submitted a 
     request to the House or Senate committees of jurisdiction for 
     each respective item included in such list) that were neither 
     committed to the conference committee by either House nor in 
     a report of a committee of either House on such bill or on a 
     companion measure; or
       ``(2) a statement that the proposition contains no 
     congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited 
     tariff benefits.''; and
       (2) in paragraph (c) (as redesignated)--
       (A) in the first sentence, after ``paragraph (a)'' insert 
     ``or (b)''; and
       (B) amend the second sentence to read as follows:
       ``As disposition of a point of order under this paragraph 
     or paragraph (b), the Chair shall put the question of 
     consideration with respect to the rule or order or conference 
     report, as applicable.''.
       (j) Paygo.--
       (1) Amend clause 10 of rule XXI to read as follows:
       ``10.(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c), 
     it shall not be in order to consider any bill, joint 
     resolution, amendment, or conference report if the provisions 
     of such measure affecting direct spending and revenues have 
     the net effect of increasing the deficit or reducing the 
     surplus for either the period comprising--
       ``(A) the current fiscal year, the budget year set forth in 
     the most recently completed concurrent resolution on the 
     budget, and the four fiscal years following that budget year; 
     or
       ``(B) the current fiscal year, the budget year set forth in 
     the most recently completed concurrent resolution on the 
     budget, and the nine fiscal years following that budget year.
       ``(2) The effect of such measure on the deficit or surplus 
     shall be determined on the basis of estimates made by the 
     Committee on the Budget relative to baseline estimates 
     supplied by the Congressional Budget Office consistent with 
     section 257 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit 
     Control Act of 1985.
       ``(b) If a bill, joint resolution, or amendment is 
     considered pursuant to a special order of the House directing 
     the Clerk to add as new matter at the end of such measure the 
     provisions of a separate measure as passed by the House, the 
     provisions of such separate measure as passed by the House 
     shall be included in the evaluation under paragraph (a) of 
     the bill, joint resolution, or amendment.
       ``(c)(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2), the 
     evaluation under paragraph (a) shall exclude a provision 
     expressly designated as an emergency for purposes of pay-as-
     you-go principles in the case of a point of order under this 
     clause against consideration of--
       ``(A) a bill or joint resolution;
       ``(B) an amendment made in order as original text by a 
     special order of business;
       ``(C) a conference report; or
       ``(D) an amendment between the Houses.
       ``(2) In the case of an amendment (other than one specified 
     in subparagraph (1)) to a bill or joint resolution, the 
     evaluation under paragraph (a) shall give no cognizance to 
     any designation of emergency.
       ``(3) If a bill, a joint resolution, an amendment made in 
     order as original text by a special order of business, a 
     conference report, or an amendment between the Houses 
     includes a provision expressly designated as an emergency for 
     purposes of pay-as-you-go principles, the Chair shall put the 
     question of consideration with respect thereto.''.
       (2) In clause 7 of rule XXI, strike ``the period comprising 
     the current fiscal year and the five fiscal years beginning 
     with the fiscal year that ends in the following calendar year 
     or the period comprising the current fiscal year and the ten 
     fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the 
     following calendar year'' and insert ``period described in 
     clause 10(a)''.
       (k) Disclosure by Members of Employment Negotiations.--In 
     clause 1 of rule XXVII, strike ``until after his or her 
     successor has been elected,''.
       (l) Gender Neutrality.--
       (1) In the standing rules--
       (A) strike ``chairman'' each place it appears and insert 
     ``chair''; and
       (B) strike ``Chairman'' each place it appears and insert 
     ``Chair'' (except in clause 4(a)(1)(B) of rule X).
       (2) In rule I--
       (A) in clause 1 strike ``his'';
       (B) in clause 7, strike ``his'' and insert ``such'';
       (C) in clause 8--
       (i) in paragraph (b)(1) strike ``his''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (b)(3)(B), strike ``his election and 
     whenever he deems'' and insert ``the election of the Speaker 
     and whenever''; and
       (D) in clause 12--
       (i) in paragraph (c) strike ``he'' and insert ``the 
     Speaker''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (d) strike ``his opinion'' and insert 
     ``the opinion of the Speaker''.
       (3) In rule II--
       (A) in clause 1--
       (i) strike ``his office'' and insert ``the office'';
       (ii) strike ``his knowledge and ability'' and insert ``the 
     knowledge and ability of the officer''; and
       (iii) strike ``his department'' and insert ``the department 
     concerned'';
       (B) in clause 2--
       (i) in paragraph (b) strike ``he is required to make'' and 
     insert ``required to be made by such officer'';
       (ii) in paragraph (g) strike ``his temporary absence or 
     disability'' and insert ``the temporary absence or disability 
     of the Clerk''; and
       (iii) in paragraph (i)(1) strike ``Whenever the Clerk is 
     acting as a supervisory authority over such staff, he'' and 
     insert ``When acting as a supervisory authority over such 
     staff, the Clerk''; and
       (C) in clause 3--
       (i) in paragraph (a) strike ``him'' and insert ``the 
     Sergeant-at-Arms'';
       (ii) in paragraph (b) strike ``him'' and insert ``the 
     Sergeant-at-Arms'';
       (iii) in paragraph (c) strike ``his employees'' and insert 
     ``employees of the office of the Sergeant-at-Arms''; and
       (iv) in paragraph (d)--

       (I) strike ``; and'' and insert ``and,''; and
       (II) strike ``he''.

       (4) In rule III--
       (A) in clause 1 strike ``he has'' and insert ``having''; 
     and
       (B) in clause 2(a)--
       (i) strike ``his vote'' and insert ``the vote of such 
     Member''; and
       (ii) strike ``his presence'' and insert ``the presence of 
     such Member''.
       (5) In rule IV--
       (A) in clause 4(a) strike ``he or she'' and insert ``such 
     individual''; and
       (B) in clause 6(b) strike ``his family'' and insert ``the 
     family of such individual''.
       (6) In rule V--
       (A) strike ``administer a system subject to his direction 
     and control'' each place it appears and insert ``administer, 
     direct, and control a system'';
       (B) strike ``he'' each place it appears and insert ``the 
     Speaker''; and
       (C) in clause 3 strike ``his'' and insert ``the''.
       (7) In rule VI, strike ``he'' each place it appears and 
     insert ``the Speaker''.
       (8) In clause 7 of rule VII, strike ``his office'' each 
     place it appears and insert ``the office of the Clerk''.
       (9) In clause 6(b) of rule VIII, strike ``he'' and insert 
     ``the Speaker''.
       (10) In clause 2(a)(1) of rule IX, strike ``his'' and 
     insert ``an''.
       (11) In rule X--

[[Page H8]]

       (A) in clause 4(f)(1), strike ``President submits his 
     budget'' and insert ``submission of the budget by the 
     President'';
       (B) in clause 5--
       (i) in paragraph (a)(4)--

       (I) strike ``his designee'' each place it appears and 
     insert ``a designee''; and
       (II) strike ``his respective party'' each place it appears 
     and insert ``the respective party of such individual'';

       (ii) in paragraph (b)(1) strike ``he was''; and
       (iii) in paragraph (c) strike ``chairmanship'' and insert 
     ``chair'';
       (C) in clause 8--
       (i) strike ``his expenses'' each place it appears and 
     insert ``the expenses of such individual''; and
       (ii) strike ``he'' each place it appears;
       (D) in clause 10(a) strike ``he is''; and
       (E) in clause 11--
       (i) in paragraph (a)(3) strike ``member of his leadership 
     staff to assist him in his capacity'' and insert ``respective 
     leadership staff member to assist in the capacity of the 
     Speaker or Minority Leader'';
       (ii) in paragraph (e)(1) strike ``his employment or 
     contractual agreement'' and insert ``the employment or 
     contractual agreement of such employee or person''; and
       (iii) in paragraph (g)(2)--

       (I) in subdivision (B)--

       (aa) strike ``he'' and insert ``the President''; and
       (bb) strike ``his''; and

       (II) in subdivision (C) strike ``his''.

       (12) In rule XI--
       (A) in clause 2--
       (i) in paragraph (c)(1) strike ``he'' and insert ``the 
     chair''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (k)(9) strike ``his testimony'' and 
     insert ``the testimony of such witness'';
       (B) in clause 3--
       (i) in paragraph (a) strike ``his duties or the discharge 
     of his responsibilities'' each place it appears and insert 
     ``the duties or the discharge of the responsibilities of such 
     individual'';
       (ii) in paragraph (b)--

       (I) in subparagraph (2)(B) strike ``he'' and insert ``such 
     Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner''; and
       (II) in subparagraph (5) strike ``disqualify himself'' and 
     insert ``seek disqualification'';

       (iii) in paragraph (g)--

       (I) in subparagraph (1)(B) strike ``he is'';
       (II) in subparagraph (1)(E) strike ``his or her employment 
     or duties with the committee'' and insert ``the employment or 
     duties with the committee of such individual''; and
       (III) in subparagraph (4)--

       (aa) strike ``his or her personal staff'' and insert ``the 
     respective personal staff of the chair or ranking minority 
     member''; and
       (bb) strike ``he'' and insert ``the chair or ranking 
     minority member'';
       (iv) in paragraph (p)--

       (I) in subparagraph (2) strike ``his counsel'' and insert 
     ``the counsel of the respondent'';
       (II) in subparagraph (4)--

       (aa) strike ``his or her counsel'' and insert ``the counsel 
     of the respondent''; and
       (bb) strike ``his counsel'' and insert ``the counsel of the 
     respondent'';

       (III) in subparagraph (7) strike ``his counsel'' and insert 
     ``the counsel of a respondent''; and
       (IV) in subparagraph (8) strike ``him'' and insert ``the 
     respondent''; and

       (v) in paragraph (q) strike ``his or her'' and insert 
     ``the''.
       (13) In rule XII--
       (A) in clause 2(c)(1) strike ``he'' and insert ``the 
     Speaker''; and
       (B) in clause 3 strike ``he shall endorse his name'' and 
     insert ``the Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner shall 
     sign it''.
       (14) In clause 6(d) of rule XIII, strike ``his''.
       (15) In clause 4(c)(1) of rule XVI strike ``his 
     discretion'' and insert ``the discretion of the Speaker''.
       (16) In rule XVII--
       (A) in clause 1(a) strike ``himself to `Mr. Speaker' '' and 
     insert ``the Speaker'';
       (B) in clause 6 strike ``his discretion'' and insert ``the 
     discretion of the Chair''; and
       (C) in clause 9 strike ``he'' each place it appears and 
     insert ``such individual''.
       (17) In clause 6 of rule XVIII, strike ``he'' each place it 
     appears and insert ``the Chair''.
       (18) In rule XX--
       (A) in clause 5--
       (i) in paragraph (b) strike ``him'' and insert ``the 
     Sergeant-at-Arms'';
       (ii) in paragraph (c)(3)(B)(I) strike ``his'' and insert 
     ``a''; and
       (iii) in paragraph (d) strike ``he'' and insert ``the 
     Speaker''; and
       (B) in clause 6(b)--
       (i) strike ``he'' and insert ``the Member''; and
       (ii) strike ``his'' and insert ``such''.
       (19) In clause 7(c)(1) of rule XXII, strike ``his''.
       (20) In rule XXIII--
       (A) in clause 1 strike ``conduct himself'' and insert 
     ``behave'';
       (B) in clause 3--
       (i) strike ``his beneficial interest'' and insert ``the 
     beneficial interest of such individual''; and
       (ii) strike ``his position'' and insert ``the position of 
     such individual''
       (C) in clause 6--
       (i) in paragraph (a)--

       (I) strike ``his campaign funds'' and insert ``the campaign 
     funds of such individual''; and
       (II) strike ``his personal funds'' and insert ``the 
     personal funds of such individual''; and

       (ii) in paragraph (c) strike ``his campaign account'' and 
     insert ``a campaign accounts of such individual'';
       (D) in clause 8--
       (i) in paragraph (a) strike ``he'' and insert ``such 
     employee''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (c)--

       (I) in subparagraph (1)(A) after ``his spouse'' insert 
     ``the spouse of such individual''; and
       (II) in subparagraph (1)(B) strike ``his spouse'' and 
     insert ``the spouse of such employee'';

       (E) in clause 10--
       (i) strike ``he is a'' and insert ``such individual is a'';
       (ii) strike ``his innocence'' and insert ``the innocence of 
     such Member''; and
       (iii) strike ``he is reelected'' and insert ``the Member is 
     reelected''; and
       (F) in clause 12(b)--
       (i) strike ``advises his employing authority'' and insert 
     ``advises the employing authority of such employee''; and
       (ii) strike ``from his'' and insert ``from such''; and
       (G) in clause 15 strike ``his or her family member'' each 
     place it appears and insert ``a family member of a Member, 
     Delegate, or Resident Commissioner''.
       (21) In rule XXIV--
       (A) in clause 1--
       (i) in paragraph (a) strike ``his use'' and insert ``the 
     use of such individual''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (b)(1) strike ``his principal campaign 
     committee'' and insert ``the principal campaign committee of 
     such individual'';
       (B) in clause 7 strike ``he was'';
       (C) in clause 8 strike ``he is'' and insert ``such 
     individual is''; and
       (D) in clause 10 strike ``he was'' and insert ``such 
     individual was''.
       (22) In rule XXV--
       (A) in clause 2(b) strike ``his name'' and insert ``the 
     name of such individual'';
       (B) in clause 4--
       (i) in paragraph (c) strike ``his residence or principal 
     place of employment'' and insert ``the residence or principal 
     place of employment of such individual''; and
       (ii) in paragraph (d)(1)--

       (I) in subdivision (B) strike ``he'' and insert ``such 
     individual'';
       (II) in subdivision (C) strike ``him'' and insert ``such 
     individual''; and
       (III) in subdivision (D)--

       (aa) strike ``he or his family'' and insert ``such 
     individual or the family of such individual''; and
       (bb) strike ``him'' and insert ``such individual'';
       (C) in clause 5--
       (i) strike ``his official position'' each place it appears 
     and insert ``the official position of such individual'';
       (ii) strike ``his actual knowledge'' each place it appears 
     and insert ``the actual knowledge of such individual'';
       (iii) strike ``his duties'' each place it appears and 
     insert ``the duties of such individual'';
       (iv) in paragraph (a)(3)(D)(ii)(I) strike ``his 
     relationship'' and insert ``the relationship of such 
     individual''; and
       (v) in paragraph (a)(3)(G)(i) strike ``his spouse'' and 
     insert ``the spouse of such individual'';
       (D) in clause 6--
       (i) strike ``he acts'' and insert ``acting''; and
       (ii) strike ``he is''; and
       (E) in clause 8 strike ``his or her'' and insert ``the''.
       (23) In clause 1 of rule XXVI, strike ``him'' and insert 
     ``the Clerk''.
       (24) In clause 2 of rule XXVII, strike ``he or she'' and 
     insert ``such individual''.
       (25) In clause 2 of rule XXIX, strike ``the masculine 
     gender include the feminine'' and insert ``one gender include 
     the other''.
       (m) Technical and Codifying Changes.--
       (1) In clause 2(h) of rule II, strike ``not in session'' 
     and insert in lieu thereof ``in recess or adjournment''.
       (2) In clause 4(b) of rule IV, strike ``regulations that 
     exempt'' and insert in lieu thereof ``regulations to carry 
     out this rule including regulations that exempt''.
       (3) In clause 5(c) of rule X--
       (A) strike ``temporary absence of the chairman'' and insert 
     in lieu thereof ``absence of the member serving as chair''; 
     and
       (B) strike ``permanent''.
       (4) In clause 7(e) of rule X, strike ``signed by'' and all 
     that follows, and insert in lieu thereof ``signed by the 
     ranking member of the committee as it was constituted at the 
     expiration of the preceding Congress who is a member of the 
     majority party in the present Congress.''.
       (5) In clause 8(a) of rule X, strike ``clauses 6 and 8'' 
     and insert in lieu thereof ``clause 6''.
       (6) In clause 2(a) of rule XIII ---
       (A) in subparagraph (1), strike ``as privileged''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (2), insert ``(other than those filed 
     as privileged)'' after ``reported adversely''.
       (7) In clause 5(c)(3) of rule XX, strike ``clause 5(a) of 
     rule XX'' and insert ``paragraph (a)''.
       (8) In clause 6(c) of rule XX, after ``yeas and nays'' 
     insert ``ordered under this clause''.
       (9) In clause 7(c)(3) of rule XXII, strike ``motion meets'' 
     and insert in lieu thereof ``proponent meets''.
       (10) In clause 1(b)(2) of rule XXIV, strike ``office space, 
     furniture, or equipment, and'' and insert in lieu thereof 
     ``office space, office furniture, office equipment, or''.

[[Page H9]]

       (11) In clause 5(i)(2) of rule XXV, strike ``paragraph 
     (1)(A)'' and insert ``subparagraph (1)(A)''.

     SEC. 3. SEPARATE ORDERS.

       (a) Budget Matters.--
       (1) During the One Hundred Eleventh Congress, references in 
     section 306 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to a 
     resolution shall be construed in the House of Representatives 
     as references to a joint resolution.
       (2) During the One Hundred Eleventh Congress, in the case 
     of a reported bill or joint resolution considered pursuant to 
     a special order of business, a point of order under section 
     303 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall be 
     determined on the basis of the text made in order as an 
     original bill or joint resolution for the purpose of 
     amendment or to the text on which the previous question is 
     ordered directly to passage, as the case may be.
       (3) During the One Hundred Eleventh Congress, a provision 
     in a bill or joint resolution, or in an amendment thereto or 
     a conference report thereon, that establishes prospectively 
     for a Federal office or position a specified or minimum level 
     of compensation to be funded by annual discretionary 
     appropriations shall not be considered as providing new 
     entitlement authority within the meaning of the Congressional 
     Budget Act of 1974.
       (4)(A) During the One Hundred Eleventh Congress, except as 
     provided in subsection (C), a motion that the Committee of 
     the Whole rise and report a bill to the House shall not be in 
     order if the bill, as amended, exceeds an applicable 
     allocation of new budget authority under section 302(b) of 
     the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, as estimated by the 
     Committee on the Budget.
       (B) If a point of order under subsection (A) is sustained, 
     the Chair shall put the question: ``Shall the Committee of 
     the Whole rise and report the bill to the House with such 
     amendments as may have been adopted notwithstanding that the 
     bill exceeds its allocation of new budget authority under 
     section 302(b) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974?''. 
     Such question shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally 
     divided and controlled by a proponent of the question and an 
     opponent but shall be decided without intervening motion.
       (C) Subsection (A) shall not apply--
       (i) to a motion offered under clause 2(d) of rule XXI; or
       (ii) after disposition of a question under subsection (B) 
     on a given bill.
       (D) If a question under subsection (B) is decided in the 
     negative, no further amendment shall be in order except--
       (i) one proper amendment, which 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; and
       (ii) pro forma amendments, if offered by the chair or 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations or 
     their designees, for the purpose of debate.
       (b) Certain Subcommittees.--Notwithstanding clause 5(d) of 
     rule X, during the One Hundred Eleventh Congress--
       (1) the Committee on Armed Services may have not more than 
     seven subcommittees;
       (2) the Committee on Foreign Affairs may have not more than 
     seven subcommittees; and
       (3) the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure may 
     have not more than six subcommittees.
       (c) Exercise Facilities for Former Members.--During the One 
     Hundred Eleventh Congress--
       (1) The House of Representatives may not provide access to 
     any exercise facility which is made available exclusively to 
     Members and former Members, officers and former officers of 
     the House of Representatives, and their spouses to any former 
     Member, former officer, or spouse who is a lobbyist 
     registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 or any 
     successor statute or agent of a foreign principal as defined 
     in clause 5 of rule XXV. For purposes of this section, the 
     term ``Member'' includes a Delegate or Resident Commissioner 
     to the Congress.
       (2) The Committee on House Administration shall promulgate 
     regulations to carry out this subsection.
       (d) Numbering of Bills.--In the One Hundred Eleventh 
     Congress, the first 10 numbers for bills (H.R. 1 through H.R. 
     10) shall be reserved for assignment by the Speaker.
       (e) Medicare Cost Containment.--Section 803 of the Medicare 
     Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 
     shall not apply during the One Hundred Eleventh Congress.

     SEC. 4. COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS, AND HOUSE OFFICES.

       (a) Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global 
     Warming.--
       (1) Establishment; composition.--
       (A) Establishment.--There is hereby established a Select 
     Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming 
     (hereinafter in this section referred to as the ``select 
     committee'').
       (B) Composition.--The select committee shall be composed of 
     15 members appointed by the Speaker, of whom 6 shall be 
     appointed on the recommendation of the Minority Leader. The 
     Speaker shall designate one member of the select committee as 
     its chair. A vacancy in the membership of the select 
     committee shall be filled in the same manner as the original 
     appointment.
       (2) Jurisdiction; functions.--
       (A) Legislative jurisdiction.--The select committee shall 
     not have legislative jurisdiction and shall have no authority 
     to take legislative action on any bill or resolution.
       (B) Investigative jurisdiction.--The sole authority of the 
     select committee shall be to investigate, study, make 
     findings, and develop recommendations on policies, 
     strategies, technologies and other innovations, intended to 
     reduce the dependence of the United States on foreign sources 
     of energy and achieve substantial and permanent reductions in 
     emissions and other activities that contribute to climate 
     change and global warming.
       (3) Procedure.--(A) Except as specified in paragraph (2), 
     the select committee shall have the authorities and 
     responsibilities of, and shall be subject to the same 
     limitations and restrictions as, a standing committee of the 
     House, and shall be deemed a committee of the House for all 
     purposes of law or rule.
       (B)(i) Rules X and XI shall apply to the select committee 
     where not inconsistent with this resolution.
       (ii) Service on the select committee shall not count 
     against the limitations in clause 5(b)(2) of rule X.
       (4) Funding.--To enable the select committee to carry out 
     the purposes of this section--
       (A) the select committee may use the services of staff of 
     the House; and
       (B) the select committee shall be eligible for interim 
     funding pursuant to clause 7 of rule X.
       (5) Reporting.--The select committee may report to the 
     House from time to time the results of its investigations and 
     studies, together with such detailed findings and 
     recommendations as it may deem advisable. All such reports 
     shall be submitted to the House by December 31, 2010.
       (b) House Democracy Assistance Commission.--House 
     Resolution 24, One Hundred Tenth Congress, shall apply in the 
     One Hundred Eleventh Congress in the same manner as such 
     resolution applied in the One Hundred Tenth Congress.
       (c) Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission.--Sections 1 through 
     7 of House Resolution 1451, One Hundred Tenth Congress, shall 
     apply in the One Hundred Eleventh Congress in the same manner 
     as such provisions applied in the One Hundred Tenth Congress, 
     except that --
       (1) the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission may, in addition 
     to collaborating closely with other professional staff 
     members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, collaborate 
     closely with professional staff members of other relevant 
     committees; and
       (2) the resources of the Committee on Foreign Affairs which 
     the Commission may use shall include all resources which the 
     Committee is authorized to obtain from other offices of the 
     House of Representatives.
       (d) Office of Congressional Ethics.-- Section 1 of House 
     Resolution 895, One Hundred Tenth Congress, shall apply in 
     the One Hundred Eleventh Congress in the same manner as such 
     provision applied in the One Hundred Tenth Congress, except 
     that the Office of Congressional Ethics shall be treated as a 
     standing committee of the House for purposes of section 
     202(i) of the Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 
     U.S.C. 72a(i)).
       (e) Empanelling Investigative Subcommittee of the Committee 
     on Standards of Official Conduct.--The text of House 
     Resolution 451, One Hundred Tenth Congress, shall apply in 
     the One Hundred Eleventh Congress in the same manner as such 
     provision applied in the One Hundred Tenth Congress.
       (f) Continuing Authorities for the Committee on the 
     Judiciary and the Office of General Counsel.--
       (1) The House authorizes--
       (A) the Committee on the Judiciary of the 111th Congress to 
     act as the successor in interest to the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the 110th Congress with respect to the civil 
     action Committee on the Judiciary v. Harriet Meirs et al., 
     filed by the Committee on the Judiciary in the 110th Congress 
     pursuant to House Resolution 980; and
       (B) the chair of the Committee on the Judiciary (when 
     elected), on behalf of the Committee on the Judiciary, and 
     the Office of General Counsel to take such steps as may be 
     appropriate to ensure continuation of such civil action, 
     including amending the complaint as circumstances may 
     warrant.
       (2)(A) The House authorizes--
       (i) the Committee on the Judiciary to take depositions by a 
     member or counsel of the committee related to the 
     investigation into the firing of certain United States 
     Attorneys and related matters; and
       (ii) the chair of the Committee on the Judiciary (when 
     elected), on behalf of the Committee on the Judiciary, to 
     issue subpoenas related to the investigation into the firing 
     of certain United States Attorneys and related matters 
     including for the purpose of taking depositions by a member 
     or counsel of the committee.
       (B) Depositions taken under the authority prescribed in 
     this paragraph shall be governed by the procedures submitted 
     for printing in the Congressional Record by the chair of the 
     Committee on Rules (when elected) or by such other procedures 
     as the Committee on the Judiciary shall prescribe.
       (3) The House authorizes the chair of the Committee on the 
     Judiciary (when elected), on behalf of the Committee on the 
     Judiciary, and the Office of General Counsel to petition to 
     join as a party to the civil action referenced in paragraph 
     (1) any individual subpoenaed by the Committee on the 
     Judiciary

[[Page H10]]

     of the 110th Congress as part of its investigation into the 
     firing of certain United States Attorneys and related matters 
     who failed to comply with such subpoena or, at the 
     authorization of the Speaker after consultation with the 
     Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group, to initiate judicial 
     proceedings concerning the enforcement of subpoenas issued to 
     such individuals.

     SEC. 5. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS.

       (a) Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.--Upon the adoption of 
     this resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House 
     the bill (H.R. 11) to amend title VII of the Civil Rights Act 
     of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 
     the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, and the 
     Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to clarify that a discriminatory 
     compensation decision or other practice that is unlawful 
     under such Acts occurs each time compensation is paid 
     pursuant to the discriminatory compensation decision or other 
     practice, and for other purposes. All points of order against 
     the bill and against its consideration are waived except 
     those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The bill 
     shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be 
     considered as ordered on the bill to final passage without 
     intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally 
     divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the 
     Minority Leader or their designees; and (2) one motion to 
     recommit.
       (b)(1) Paycheck Fairness Act.--Upon the adoption of this 
     resolution it shall be in order to consider in the House the 
     bill (H.R. 12) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 
     to provide more effective remedies to victims of 
     discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex, 
     and for other purposes. All points of order against the bill 
     and against its consideration are waived except those arising 
     under clause 9 or10 of rule XXI. The bill shall be considered 
     as read. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 
     on the bill to final passage without intervening motion 
     except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled 
     by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their 
     designees; and (2) one motion to recommit.
       (2) In the engrossment of H.R. 11, the Clerk shall--
       (A) add the text of H.R. 12, as passed by the House, as new 
     matter at the end of H.R. 11;
       (B) conform the title of H.R. 11 to reflect the addition to 
     the engrossment of H.R. 12;
       (C) assign appropriate designations to provisions within 
     the engrossment; and
       (D) conform provisions for short titles within the 
     engrossment.
       (3) Upon the addition of the text of H.R. 12 to the 
     engrossment of H.R. 11, H.R. 12 shall be laid on the table.

  Mr. HOYER (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the resolution be considered as read and printed in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Maryland is recognized 
for 1 hour.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), or his 
designee, pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
During consideration of the resolution, all time yielded is for 
purposes of debate only.
  Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago Democrats were elected to the majority with 
a pledge that under our leadership the House would dedicate itself to 
integrity and accountability. We believe we kept that promise.
  Today, gifts from lobbyists are banned, the use of corporate jets is 
prohibited, the earmark process is transparent, all House employees are 
trained in ethics, and an independent Office of Congressional Ethics 
has been established.
  But we also understand that holding this House to high standards is 
not simply the work of one session or one resolution or, indeed, one 
Congress. It is a project for all of us to renew year after year. I 
would like to touch on some of the most important new standards for the 
111th Congress: a new rules package that will ensure that the House 
does the people's work ethically and efficiently.
  First, we understand that ``revolving door'' between the public and 
private sectors can compromise the independence of judgment that voters 
want and deserve. That is why these new rules will prevent ``lame 
duck'' Members from negotiating employment contracts in secret before 
their terms expire.
  Secondly, the rules will no longer set term limits for committee 
Chairs. I understand that our Republican colleagues once wrote term 
limits into the rules in an effort against the entrenched power. But it 
is now clear that that effort fell victim to what conservatives like to 
call the law of unintended consequences.
  With chairmanships up for grabs so frequently, fundraising ability 
became one of the most important for job qualification, and legislative 
skill was sacrificed to political considerations.
  Third, these rules limit the abuse of motions to recommit. We invite 
good-faith efforts to improve legislation. And in these hard times, we 
need the Republican Party to be constructive partners in policy making. 
We welcome it. But we all understand which motions are not offered in 
good faith. Those are the motions that attempt to kill bills through 
parliamentary tricks and waste our constituents' time on ``gotcha'' 
politics.
  Fourth, we are continuing our work to reform earmarks, removing 
loopholes that allow Members to make some earmarks in secret.
  Fifth and finally, these rules confirm our commitment to fiscal 
responsibility.
  A binge of borrowing has weakened our economy, tied our hands in a 
financial crisis, and saddled our children and grandchildren with $9 
trillion in foreign-owned debt. That recklessness must end, and these 
rules will help end it.
  Mr. Speaker, these rules embody our vision for the House as an 
institution: a place that debates constructively, spends wisely, and 
lives in the actions of all its Members and all its staff by a standard 
we can be proud of.
  That is our vision for this House, and I urge my colleagues to adopt 
these rules.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the balance of my time be 
controlled by the chairwoman of the Rules Committee, the distinguished 
gentlewoman from New York, Chairwoman Slaughter.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  I want to begin by thanking the gentleman from Maryland for his 
statement and yielding me the time to present the opening day's rules 
package for the 111th Congress.
  Mr. Speaker, rarely has our great Nation faced such grave challenges. 
Millions of Americans are without jobs and consequently also without 
health insurance. Our troops are fighting two wars overseas. And as our 
economy spirals downward, Americans from coast to coast are struggling 
to make ends meet.
  But there is reason to hope. In fewer than 14 days, a new President 
will be sworn in. And President-elect Barack Obama, the House Democrats 
and I, and my Republican friends are committed to rolling up our 
sleeves and getting to work immediately to solve the critical 
challenges that face our Nation.
  On this day I am honored to address the House at the beginning of the 
111th Congress to present the rules package that will govern this body 
as we work to meet the needs of American families over the next 2 
years.
  It is the responsibility of the majority to protect and enhance the 
integrity of the institution, and that is what this rules package does. 
Through building upon the important rules changes that Democrats 
implemented during the last Congress, we are keeping our commitment to 
the American people to restore accountability and honesty to 
government.
  In the 110th Congress, Democrats put forth critical measures to 
restore transparency to the House. We banned gifts from lobbyists. We 
prohibited the use of corporate jets. We mandated ethics training for 
all House employees. We ensured transparency for earmarks by requiring 
the full disclosure of earmarks in all bills and conference reports. We 
established an independent Office of Congressional Ethics. And today we 
are building on our commitment to the American people to further 
strengthen the integrity of this institution in the 111th Congress.
  By closing the loophole that allowed ``lame duck'' Members to 
negotiate employment contracts in secret, we are opening the doors of 
Congress and shedding light upon the process. By codifying the 
additional earmark reforms adopted mid-term in the 110th Congress, 
coupled with the ongoing rules that required the Members' signatures 
and their reasons for their requests, we are permanently strengthening 
earlier comprehensive reforms,

[[Page H11]]

resulting in even further transparency and accountability in the 
earmark process.
  By making commonsense changes to the motion to recommit, we are 
helping Congress to function more effectively while preserving the 
minority's legitimate right to present their policy alternatives 
through offering a motion that amends the bill or a ``straight'' motion 
that sends the bill back to committee without amendment.
  By removing reference to term limits for committee Chairs from this 
package, we take away what was from the first a political consideration 
to eliminate that from the official House rules where they don't 
belong. And by maintaining strong PAYGO rules, we are demonstrating our 
strong commitment to fiscal discipline.
  These important measures make good sense to protect the integrity of 
this institution and to enable Congress to help America get back on 
track. Today, we are not only harnessing the belief that we can 
continue to restore integrity and accountability to Congress, we are 
also laying down a strong foundation for House action on the grave 
challenges that face this great Nation.
  Mr. Speaker and my friends on both sides of the aisle, the American 
people know exactly what's at stake over the next few years, which is 
why they have resoundingly raised their voices for change, and 
Democrats are listening. We are ready to help put Americans back to 
work by investing in job creation initiatives, strengthening our 
economy. We are ready to fix our broken health care system so that 
every citizen can get quality, affordable health care that they 
desperately need and are entitled to. We are ready to cultivate a clean 
energy economy by turning wind into energy, energy investments into 
innovation, and innovation into good-paying American jobs.
  We are ready to begin responsibly withdrawing troops from Iraq, ready 
to ensure quality education for our young people, ready to continue 
making the tough choices that the American people elected us to make.
  Yet in order for us to begin addressing these pressing challenges, we 
must ensure that Congress continues to put integrity and accountability 
at the heart of our daily actions. I can think of no better way to do 
that than by adopting these amendments to the House rules.
  Mr. Speaker, it will be a long and difficult journey to strengthen 
our economy, to reform the health care system, and create a clean 
energy future worthy of our children and grandchildren. But the rules 
package before us today is an important first step, one that will 
ensure integrity in Congress as we move forward on this pivotal path.
  It is time to reinvigorate America. It's time to make history. And 
let us begin.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of this commonsense rules package to 
allow the House to operate more effectively and productively in solving 
the challenges facing our great Nation while strengthening our 
integrity in Congress.

           Section-by-Section of Rule Changes--111th Congress

       The changes in the standing rules of the House made by 
     House Resolution 5 include the following:

     SEC. 2. CHANGES TO THE STANDING RULES.

       (a) Inspector General Audits.--
       In response to the recommendation of the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Committee on House 
     Administration, this provision amends clause 6(c)(1) of rule 
     II to clarify the non-traditional audit work that the 
     Inspector General does in the areas of business process 
     improvements, services to enhance the efficiency of House 
     support operations, and risk management assessments. The 
     change also will allow the Inspector General to implement 
     guidance and standards published in the Government 
     Accountability Office's Government Auditing Standards.
       (b) Homeland Security.--
       This provision amends clause 3(g) of rule X to direct the 
     Committee on Homeland Security to review and study on a 
     primary and continuing basis all Government activities, 
     programs, and organizations relating to homeland security 
     within its primary legislative jurisdiction.
       Nothing in this rule shall affect the oversight or 
     legislative authority of other committees under the Rules of 
     the House.
       The change in clause 3 of rule X clarifies the Committee on 
     Homeland Security's oversight jurisdiction over government 
     activities relating to homeland security within its primary 
     legislative jurisdiction, including the interaction of all 
     departments and agencies with the Department of Homeland 
     Security. Consistent with the designation of the Committee on 
     Homeland Security as the committee of oversight in these 
     vital areas, the House expects that the President and the 
     relevant executive agencies will forward copies of all 
     reports in this area, in addition to those already covered by 
     clause 2(b) of rule XIV, to the Committee on Homeland 
     Security to assist it in carrying out this important 
     responsibility.
       This change is meant to clarify that the various agencies 
     have a reporting relationship with the Homeland Security 
     Committee on matters within its jurisdiction in addition to 
     the agencies' reporting relationships with other committees 
     of jurisdiction.
       (c) Additional Functions of the Committee on House 
     Administration.--
       This provision amends clause 4(d) of rule X to give the 
     Committee on House Administration oversight of the management 
     of services provided to the House by the Architect of the 
     Capitol, except those services that lie within the 
     jurisdiction of the Committee on Transportation and 
     Infrastructure under clause 1(r).
       (d) Terms of Committee Chairmen.--
       This provision strikes clause 5(c)(2) of rule X to 
     eliminate term limits for committee and subcommittee chairs 
     and includes a conforming amendment to clause 5(a)(2)(C) of 
     rule X to provide an exception to the Budget Committee tenure 
     limitations for a chair or ranking minority member serving a 
     second consecutive term in the respective position.
       (e) Calendar Wednesday.--
       This provision amends clause 6 of rule XV to require the 
     Clerk to read only those committees where the committee chair 
     has given notice to the House on Tuesday that he or she will 
     seek recognition to call up a bill under the Calendar 
     Wednesday rule. This will replace the requirement that the 
     Clerk read the list of all committees, regardless of whether 
     a committee intends to utilize the rule. The provision makes 
     conforming changes to clause 6 of rule XV and clause 6 of 
     rule XIII, including the deletion of the requirement of a 
     two-thirds vote to dispense with the proceedings under 
     Calendar Wednesday.
       (f) Postponement Authority.--
       This provision adds a new paragraph (c) to clause 1 of rule 
     XIX to give permanent authority to the Chair to postpone 
     further consideration of legislation prior to final passage 
     when the previous question is operating to adoption or 
     passage of a measure pursuant to a special order of business. 
     This codifies a practice that has become routine during the 
     110th Congress.
       (g) Instructions in the Motion to Recommit.--
       This provision amends clause 2(b) of rule XIX to provide 
     that a motion to recommit a bill or joint resolution may 
     include instructions only in the form of a direction to 
     report a textual amendment or amendments back to the House 
     forthwith. The provision makes no change to the straight 
     motion to recommit.
       (h) Conduct of Votes.--
       In response to the bipartisan recommendation of the Select 
     Committee to Investigate the Voting Irregularities of August 
     2, 2007, this provision deletes the following sentence in 
     clause 2(a) of rule XX: ``A record vote by electronic device 
     shall not be held open for the sole purpose of reversing the 
     outcome of such vote.''
       (i) General Appropriation Conference Reports.--
       This provision codifies House Resolution 491, 110th 
     Congress, which was adopted by unanimous consent. The 
     provision provides a point of order against any general 
     appropriations conference report containing earmarks that are 
     included in conference reports but not committed to 
     conference by either House and not in a House or Senate 
     committee report on the legislation. A point of order under 
     the provision would be disposed of by the question of 
     consideration, which would be debatable for 20 minutes 
     equally divided.
       (j) PAYGO.--This provision amends clause 10 of rule XXI to 
     make the following changes:
       (1) A technical amendment to align the PAYGO rules of the 
     House with those of the Senate so that both houses use the 
     same CBO baselines;
       (2) The changes would also allow one House-passed measure 
     to pay for spending in a separate House-passed measure if the 
     two are linked at the engrossment stage; and
       (3) The changes would also allow for emergency exceptions 
     to PAYGO for provisions designated as emergency spending in a 
     bill, joint resolution, amendment made in order as original 
     text, conference report, or amendment between the Houses (but 
     not other amendments).
       The new clause 10(c)(3) of rule XXI provides that the Chair 
     will put the question of consideration on a bill, joint 
     resolution, an amendment made in order as original text by a 
     special order of business, a conference report, or an 
     amendment between the Houses that includes an emergency PAYGO 
     designation. The Chair will put the question of consideration 
     on such a measure without regard to a waiver of points of 
     order under clause 10 of rule XXI or language providing for 
     immediate consideration of such a measure.
       The intent of this exception to pay-as-you-go principles is 
     to allow for consideration of measures that respond to 
     emergency situations. Provisions of legislation may receive 
     an emergency designation if such provisions are necessary to 
     respond to an act of war, an

[[Page H12]]

     act of terrorism, a natural disaster, or a period of 
     sustained low economic growth. A measure that includes any 
     provision designated as emergency shall be accompanied by a 
     report or a joint statement of managers, as the case may be, 
     or include an applicable ``Findings'' section in the 
     legislation, stating the reasons why such provision meets the 
     emergency requirement according to the following criteria.
       In general, the criteria to be considered in determining 
     whether a proposed expenditure or tax change meets an 
     emergency designation include: (1) necessary, essential, or 
     vital (not merely useful or beneficial); (2) sudden, quickly 
     coming into being, and not building up over time; (3) an 
     urgent, pressing, and compelling need requiring immediate 
     action; (4) unforeseen, unpredictable, and unanticipated; and 
     (5) not permanent, but rather temporary in nature. With 
     respect to the fourth criterion above, an emergency that is 
     part of an aggregate level of anticipated emergencies, 
     particularly when normally estimated in advance, is not 
     ``unforeseen.''
       (k) Disclosure by Members of Employment Negotiations.--
       This provisions amends clause 1 of rule XXVII to close the 
     loophole in the rule that allowed lame-duck Members, 
     Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner to directly 
     negotiate future employment or compensation without public 
     disclosure. The rule will now apply to all current Members, 
     Delegates, and the Resident Commissioner requiring them, 
     within 3 business days after the commencement of such 
     negotiation or agreement of future employment or 
     compensation, to file with the Committee on Standards of 
     Official Conduct a statement regarding such negotiations or 
     agreement.
       (l) Gender Neutrality.--
       This provision amends the Rules of the House to render them 
     neutral with respect to gender. These changes are not 
     intended to effect any substantive changes.
       (m) Technical and Codifying Changes.--
       Upon the recommendation of the Parliamentarian, this 
     provision contains the following technical and codifying 
     changes:
       (1) Clarify that the authority of the Clerk to receive 
     messages on behalf of the House includes both recesses and 
     adjournments (clause 2(h) of rule II);
       (2) Restore the Speaker's regulatory authority for all of 
     rule IV (regarding access to the House floor), which was 
     inadvertently narrowed when the House last amended clause 4 
     of rule IV by the adoption of House Resolution 648, 109th 
     Congress (clause 4(b) of rule IV);
       (3) Clarify that the scheme set forth in the rule for 
     temporary management of a committee will apply pending the 
     House filling a permanent vacancy of a chairman (clause 5(c) 
     of rule X);
       (4) Clarify that the majority-party Member in the next 
     Congress, who was most senior on the committee in the 
     preceding Congress, has voucher authority pending 
     establishment and repopulation of the committee (clause 7(e) 
     of rule X);
       (5) Delete an unnecessary cross reference (clause 8(a) of 
     rule X);
       (6) Reinsert the exception, inadvertently dropped in 
     recodification in the 106th Congress, that privileged matters 
     are not automatically laid on the table when reported 
     adversely (unlike nonprivileged matters reported adversely, 
     which are automatically laid on the table) (clause 2(a) of 
     rule XIII);
       (7) Correct an internal cross reference (clause 5(c)(3) of 
     rule XX);
       (8) Clarify the availability of a motion to adjourn during 
     merger of a quorum call and the yeas and nays to include only 
     the clause 6 version of the yeas and nays (clause 6(c) of 
     rule XX);
       (9) Correct a grammatical error in the rule to clarify that 
     notice to instruct conferees at a stalled conference is given 
     by a ``proponent'' and not by a ``motion.'' (clause 7(c)(3) 
     of rule XXII);
       (10) Clarify that the rule prohibiting campaign funds for 
     official expenses applies to ``office space, office 
     furniture, or office equipment'' (clause 1(b)(2) of rule 
     XXIV); and
       (11) Corrects an internal cross reference (clause 5(i)(2) 
     of rule XXV).

     SEC. 3. SEPARATE ORDERS.

       (a) Budget Matters.--
       (1)-(3) These three provisions retain instructions on the 
     interpretation of sections 303, 306, and 401 of the 
     Congressional Budget Act, that have been in place since the 
     106th, 107th, and 109th Congresses, respectively.
       (4) This provision would retain the point of order against 
     the motion to rise and report an appropriations bill to the 
     House where the bill, as proposed to be amended, exceeded its 
     302(b) budget allocation. The point of order was created in 
     the 109th Congress and continued in the 110th Congress.
       (b) Certain Subcommittees.--
       This provision would continue to waive the requirements of 
     clause 5(d)(1) of rule X, which limits the number of 
     subcommittees for each committee to five, for the following 
     committees: Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, and 
     Transportation and Infrastructure.
       (c) Exercise Facilities for Former Members.--
       This provision continues the standing order of the House, 
     first adopted in the 109th Congress, which prohibits former 
     Members, spouses of former Members, and former officers of 
     the House from using the Members gym if those individuals are 
     registered lobbyists.
       (d) Numbering of Bills.--
       This provision continues the practice of reserving the 
     first 10 bill numbers for designation by the Speaker 
     throughout the 111th Congress.
       (e) Medicare Cost Containment.--
       This provision turns off Section 803 of the Medicare 
     Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 
     during the 111th Congress.

     SEC. 4. COMMITTEES, COMMISSIONS, AND HOUSE OFFICES.

       (a) Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global 
     Warming.--
       This provision continues the Select Committee on Energy 
     Independence and Global Warming through the 111th Congress.
       (b) House Democracy Assistance Commission.--
       This provision continues the House Democracy Assistance 
     Commission.
       (c) Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission.--
       This provision continues the Tom Lantos Human Rights 
     Commission except that it allows the Commission to 
     collaborate closely with professional staff members of other 
     relevant committees and to use resources that the Committee 
     on Foreign Affairs is authorized to obtain from other offices 
     of the House.
       (d) Office of Congressional Ethics.--
       This provision continues the Office of Congressional Ethics 
     and provides that the Office shall be treated as a standing 
     committee of the House for purposes of section 202(i) of the 
     Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946, concerning 
     consultants for Congressional committees.
       (e) Empanelling Investigative Subcommittee of the Committee 
     on Standards of Official Conduct.--
       This provision continues House Resolution 451, 110th 
     Congress, directing the Committee on Standards of Official 
     Conduct to empanel investigative subcommittees within 30 days 
     after the date a Member is indicted or criminal charges are 
     filed.
       (f) Continuing Authorities for the Committee on the 
     Judiciary and the Office of General Counsel.--
       This provision authorizes the Committee on the Judiciary 
     and the House General Counsel to continue the lawsuit derived 
     from the House holding White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten 
     and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers in contempt of 
     Congress for failure to comply with Judiciary Committee 
     subpoenas, which was initiated in the 110th Congress. With 
     respect to the continued investigation into the firing of 
     certain United States Attorneys, this provision authorizes: 
     (1) the chairman of the Judiciary Committee to issue 
     subpoenas and (2) the taking of depositions by Members or 
     counsel, which shall be governed by rules printed in the 
     Congressional Record by the Rules Committee chair or 
     otherwise prescribed by the Judiciary Committee; and (3) the 
     Judiciary Committee and General Counsel to add as a party to 
     the lawsuit any individual subpoenaed by the Committee in the 
     110th Congress who failed to comply.
       Judiciary Committee Deposition Rules: In accordance with 
     the Committee receiving special authorization by the House 
     for the taking of depositions in furtherance of a Committee 
     investigation, the chair, upon consultation with a designated 
     minority member, may order the taking of depositions pursuant 
     to notice or subpoena. The designated minority member shall 
     be the ranking minority member or, if a ranking minority 
     member has not been elected, the highest ranking member of 
     the Committee as it was constituted at the end of the 
     preceding Congress who is a member of the minority party in 
     the present Congress.
       The chair or majority staff shall consult with the 
     designated minority member or minority staff, respectively, 
     at least two days before any notice or subpoena for a 
     deposition is issued. Upon completion of such consultation, 
     all members shall receive written notice that a notice or 
     subpoena for a deposition will be issued.
       A notice or subpoena issued for the taking of a deposition 
     shall specify the date, time, and place of the deposition and 
     the method or methods by which the deposition will be 
     recorded. The chair shall designate the number of majority 
     members and majority counsel to conduct the deposition; the 
     designated minority member shall be permitted to appoint an 
     equal number of minority members and an equal number of 
     minority counsel to conduct the deposition.
       A deposition shall be taken under oath or affirmation 
     administered by a member or a person otherwise authorized to 
     administer oaths and affirmations.
       A deponent shall not be required to testify unless the 
     deponent has been provided with a copy of such rules of 
     procedure then in being prescribed by the Committee, this 
     rule as applicable, section 4 of House Resolution 5, and rule 
     X and rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives.
       A deponent may be accompanied at a deposition by counsel to 
     advise the deponent of the deponent's rights. Only members 
     and Committee counsel, however, may examine the deponent. No 
     one may be present at a deposition other than members, 
     Committee staff designated by the chair or designated 
     minority member, such individuals as may be required to 
     administer the oath or affirmation and transcribe or record 
     the proceedings, the deponent, and the deponent's counsel 
     (including personal counsel and counsel for the entity 
     employing the deponent if the scope of the deposition is 
     expected to cover actions taken as part of the deponent's 
     employment). Observers or counsel for other persons or 
     entities may not attend.

[[Page H13]]

       Questions in a deposition shall be propounded in rounds, 
     alternating between the majority and minority. A single round 
     shall not exceed 60 minutes per side, unless the members or 
     counsel conducting the deposition agree to a different length 
     of questioning. In each round, a member or Committee counsel 
     designated by the chair shall ask questions first, and the 
     member or Committee counsel designated by the designated 
     minority member shall ask questions second.
       Any objection made during a deposition must be stated 
     concisely and in a non-argumentative and non-suggestive 
     manner. The deponent may refuse to answer only when necessary 
     to preserve a privilege. In instances where the deponent or 
     counsel has objected to a question to preserve a privilege 
     and accordingly the deponent has refused to answer the 
     question to preserve such privilege, the chair may rule on 
     any such objection after the deposition has adjourned. If the 
     chair overrules any such objection and thereby orders a 
     deponent to answer any question to which a privilege 
     objection was lodged, such order shall be filed with the 
     clerk of the Committee and shall be provided to members and 
     the deponent no less than three days before being 
     implemented.
       If a member of the Committee appeals in writing the order 
     of the chair, the appeal shall be preserved for Committee 
     consideration. A deponent who refuses to answer a question 
     after being directed to answer by the chair in writing may be 
     subject to sanction, except that no sanctions may be imposed 
     if the ruling of the chair is reversed on appeal. Consistent 
     with clause 2(k)(8) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives, the committee shall remain the sole judge of 
     the pertinence of testimony and evidence adduced at its 
     hearings.
       Deposition testimony shall be transcribed by stenographic 
     means and may also be video recorded. The Clerk of the 
     Committee shall receive the transcript and any video 
     recording and promptly forward such to minority staff at the 
     same time the Clerk distributes such to other majority staff.
       The individual administering the oath, if other than a 
     member, shall certify on the transcript that the deponent was 
     duly sworn. The transcriber shall certify that the transcript 
     is a true, verbatim record of the testimony, and the 
     transcript and any exhibits shall be filed, as shall any 
     video recording, with the clerk of the Committee in 
     Washington, DC. In no case shall any video recording be 
     considered the official transcript of a deposition or 
     otherwise supersede the certified written transcript. 
     Depositions shall be considered to have been taken in 
     Washington, DC, as well as the location actually taken, once 
     filed with the clerk of the Committee for the Committee's 
     use.
       After receiving the transcript, majority staff shall make 
     available the transcript for review by the deponent or 
     deponent's counsel. No later than ten business days 
     thereafter, the deponent may submit suggested changes to the 
     chair. The majority staff of the Committee may direct the 
     Clerk of the Committee to note any typographical errors, 
     including any requested by the deponent or minority staff, 
     via an errata sheet appended to the transcript. Any proposed 
     substantive changes, modifications, clarifications, or 
     amendments to the deposition testimony must be submitted by 
     the deponent as an affidavit that includes the deponent's 
     reasons therefor. Any substantive changes, modifications, 
     clarifications, or amendments shall be included as an 
     appendix to the transcript. Majority and minority staff both 
     shall be provided with a copy of the final transcript of the 
     deposition with any appendices at the same time.

     SEC. 5. SPECIAL ORDERS OF BUSINESS.

       This section consists of a special order of business 
     providing for consideration of the following two bills (the 
     text of each of which is identical to the 110th House-passed 
     versions):
       (1) H.R. 11--Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, to amend title 
     VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination 
     in Employment Act of 1967, the Americans with Disabilities 
     Act of 1990, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to clarify 
     that a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice 
     that is unlawful under such Acts occurs each time 
     compensation is paid pursuant to the discriminatory 
     compensation decision or other practice, and for other 
     purposes, and
       (2) H.R. 12--Paycheck Fairness Act, to amend the Fair Labor 
     Standards Act of 1938 to provide more effective remedies to 
     victims of discrimination in the payment of wages on the 
     basis of sex, and for other purposes.
       The special order allows for separate consideration of each 
     measure under a closed rule. After adoption of the second 
     bill, the text of H.R. 12 will be added to H.R. 11 and H.R. 
     12 will be laid on the table.

  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I begin by thanking my good friend from 
Rochester, the distinguished Chair of the Committee on Rules, Ms. 
Slaughter, for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. And I congratulate 
her and all of our colleagues on their membership in the 111th 
Congress.
  As we have heard from the speeches delivered by the Speaker and the 
Republican leader, today marks the start of the 111th Congress, a new 
beginning for the first branch and for the people's House.
  As was stated, 2 weeks from today we are going to be making history 
with the inauguration of Barack Obama. President-elect Obama has 
already reached out to congressional Republicans, expressing his desire 
to work with us in this new Congress.
  We all know very well what an honorable campaign Mr. Obama ran. While 
I didn't support his candidacy, I, like many of my colleagues and 
fellow Americans, was inspired by his message of hope, unity, and 
change for the future.

                              {time}  1445

  He laid out a vision that replaces bitterness with bipartisanship, 
cynicism with a sincere commitment to a brighter future.
  Of course, there is a great divergence of opinion on the details of 
exactly how we reach that brighter future. Congressional Republicans 
have our agenda. We feel very strongly about it. We are committed more 
than ever to the principles for which we stand. But we wholeheartedly 
agree with Mr. Obama that the way forward is through open, inclusive 
debate, a strong spirit of bipartisanship and the sincere pursuit of 
common ground.
  Unfortunately, the high-minded rhetoric of the Presidential campaign 
only highlights the pure cynicism of this rules package that we are 
considering today. The Democratic leadership of this House is poised to 
consider, as its very first legislative act of this Congress, a rules 
package that literally shreds the Obama vision.
  I am going to repeat that, Mr. Speaker. The package that we are going 
to be voting on today literally shreds the Obama vision. Fourteen days 
before he is even inaugurated into office, the President-elect's plan 
for unity and bipartisanship is being obstructed by his own party.
  This rules package takes the abysmal record of the last Congress and 
actually makes it more restrictive. You will hear a lot today about 
arcane procedural tactics and wonder how it has any relevance to the 
problems that we face as a nation. But these changes, Mr. Speaker, have 
enormous consequences for the conduct and outcome of our policy 
debates.
  Mr. Speaker, process is substance. As we tackle enormously important 
issues like, as everyone has said, getting our economy back on track, 
we cannot achieve a good outcome without a good process. We are very 
attuned to the concept of history being made right now and 2 weeks from 
today, so perhaps we should look at history.
  The motion to recommit, as we know it today, was granted to the 
minority 100 years ago following a rebellion against the most 
dictatorial Speaker of the last century, Joseph Gurney ``Uncle Joe'' 
Cannon. This motion ensures that the minority gets at least one 
opportunity, one opportunity to offer an amendment or an alternative. 
During the Democrats' 40-year reign, they routinely denied Republicans, 
often dozens of times in a Congress, the single bite at the apple, one 
opportunity to offer an alternative. Mr. Speaker, when we took the 
majority in 1995, we guaranteed the right of the motion to recommit, 
and we never, we never denied it.
  This body has always been governed by majority rule. The majority has 
a number of tools at its disposal, not least of which is the Rules 
Committee itself, on which I am privileged to serve. That's how they 
advance their agenda. An effective majority can abide by the rules and 
traditions of the House and still succeed legislatively.
  By contrast, in the 110th Congress, the Democratic leadership chose, 
instead, to resort to procedural gimmickry to advance their agenda. 
They had every legislative advantage as the majority party, and yet 
they felt compelled to trample the traditions of the House, rather than 
build consensus or engage in actual deliberation. They went so far as 
to shut down the appropriations process to avoid open debate. Mr. 
Speaker, as for the motion to recommit, that one single opportunity, 
that one single opportunity for minority input, the Democratic 
leadership

[[Page H14]]

frequently resorted to legislative tricks to deny it.
  Now, the Democratic leadership is no longer content to shut down 
debate on an ad hoc basis. They are making it official with this rules 
package. The underlying resolution contains a host of new procedural 
gimmicks to stifle debate and to perpetuate partisanship. This 
resolution changes the rules of the House to formally limit, to 
formally limit, the motion to recommit. This limitation prevents any 
bill from being returned to committee for further deliberation. It 
restricts Members' ability to strip out tax increases. Apparently, the 
Democratic majority believes tax increases are sacred, but open debate 
is not sacred.
  This rules package also manipulates our budget rules, once again, to 
protect tax increases, as well as to protect spending increases. You 
see, Mr. Speaker, the Democratic leadership not only spent the last 
Congress shutting out Republicans, they also had to find clever ways to 
shut out fiscally conservative Democrats. Trying to build consensus 
within their own party was very time consuming. They learned their 
lesson, though. This rules package guts the budget rules that many 
Democrats hold so dear.
  The laundry list of rules changes goes on. They cut term limits for 
committee chairmen, they scrap Medicare cost-containment measures. And 
if all this weren't enough, they include completely closed rules, 
completely closed rules for the two bills that will be considered later 
this week without ever having the Rules Committee meet. Apparently, the 
Democratic leadership scoured the House rules for accountability and 
transparency measures and systematically dismantled what they found.
  So much, Mr. Speaker, for the Obama vision. While he is calling for 
the most transparent administration in our Nation's history, his 
congressional Democrats are launching the most closed Congress in 
history.
  But I believe that President-elect Obama is sincere. Since the day he 
was elected, he has been reaching out to Republicans. He has called 
many of us individually to express a sincere desire to move beyond the 
divisiveness of politics and to work together. I can only imagine the 
chagrin at his own party, their attempt to undermine his best efforts. 
Today's rules package is a huge step backward. It sets the stage for 
even more closed, bitter, rancorous debate.
  The next major item on the agenda is more than a $1 trillion stimulus 
package. Republican Leader John Boehner has laid out several modest, 
but critically important, requests for an open process. There should be 
public hearings. The text should be available online for a full week 
prior to a vote. There should be no special-interest earmarks.
  These are commonsense guidelines that are widely supported by the 
American people. They understand that our response to the economic 
crisis is too important to allow it to be slapped together in secret 
behind closed doors and rammed through the House. Both Democrats and 
Republicans have a number of good ideas that should be considered and 
debated.
  Today I will be pursuing an economic recovery package that focuses on 
pro-growth policies. I am introducing a trio of bills aimed at growing 
our economy by simplifying and reducing the tax burden on individuals 
and job creators, jump-starting our housing market and reviving the 
auto industry.
  I hope we can move forward on these kinds of policies, but neither I 
nor my colleagues ask to prejudge the outcome of those debates. We 
simply ask that that debate take place.
  Majority Leader Hoyer agrees, and said so on an interview that he had 
this past Sunday. We can only hope he is able to convince the Speaker 
to keep the process open and transparent. If her leadership's first 
legislative act of this Congress is any indication, it won't be a 
fruitful endeavor.
  Mr. Speaker, today's new beginning is nothing more than a new low for 
the Democratic majority. Their cynicism and manipulation is all the 
more dismal against the backdrop of President-elect Obama's vision for 
hope, unity and change for the better. The Democratic majority's 
actions today do not represent change that fulfills hope. This is 
change that denies hope.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to oppose this rules package.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 5 minutes to the 
vice chair of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. McGovern).
  (Mr. McGOVERN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. McGOVERN. I want to thank the gentlelady from New York, the 
distinguished Chair of the Rules Committee, for yielding me the time.
  First, let me congratulate Speaker Pelosi as she begins her second 
term as Speaker of the House. I also want to congratulate my colleagues 
for their elections, and I welcome our new colleagues to the House of 
Representatives.
  Our Nation is facing very challenging times. Twelve years ago, when I 
was first elected to Congress, our economy was still growing, and we 
were looking at a significant budget surplus. Our world was relatively 
peaceful. Now, after 8 years of reckless and wasteful spending, and 
after an ill-advised war, we face a global economic meltdown and 
international instability that seem to be spreading all too quickly.
  In November, the American people elected a new President and larger 
Democratic majorities in the Congress. The voters sent a very clear 
message. Things have got to change here in Washington, and Congress has 
to accomplish things.
  We know that Congress will need to act quickly and responsibly in 
order to pass legislation to help our Nation solve our economic and 
foreign policy problems. This rules package is designed to help us do 
just that. This is a good package, and I am pleased to support it 
today.
  There are many important parts this package. I am pleased that this 
is first rules package that is gender neutral. There are other 
technical fixes included in this package that will help the House 
operate more smoothly and efficiently.
  One of the major changes, as we have heard, in this package deals 
with the motion to recommit, which is modernized in this package. 
Specifically, the minority will no longer be able to offer a 
``promptly'' motion to recommit, which sends bills back to committee 
with no timetable for return, essentially killing the bill.
  The minority, however, will have the ability to offer a proper 
``forthwith'' motion or a ``straight'' motion. But no longer will the 
minority be able to abuse the process by offering political amendments 
designed to either kill a bill without actually voting against it or to 
provide fodder for a 30-second political ad.
  During the 12 years while Democrats were in the minority, we offered 
only 36 ``promptly'' motions to recommit. Over the past 2 years, 
Republicans offered 50 of these motions.
  Following the 2006 elections that brought Democrats back into the 
majority in the House, the new Republican minority had two options, 
either work in a bipartisan way to address the needs of the American 
people, or obstruct the business of this House through gotcha-style 
politics. Unfortunately, too often they chose the latter.
  The motion to recommit was not designed for this purpose. It was 
designed to be a tool for legislating, not a political weapon. 
Repeatedly, the Democratic majority attempted to work with the 
Republican minority on their motions to recommit, but every time we 
offered to accept their motion in return for not killing the bill, the 
Republican minority refused. They chose talking points over 
accomplishments. They chose to be the party of obstructionism, not 
offering alternatives, but instead trying to derail the entire process 
for political gain. It's a cynical way to do business.
  That's not legislating, and it's not what the voters sent us here to 
do. I strongly disagree with those who say modernizing the motion to 
recommit is undemocratic. Let me be clear, any Member who opposes a 
bill still has the ability, indeed, the responsibility, to vote ``no.''
  Congressional scholar Norm Ornstein said it best, and I quote, ``A 
minority party deserves the right to be heard and to have alternatives 
considered, but with those rights comes responsibilities. If the 
minority uses the opportunity to offer amendments to exploit cynically 
the opening for political

[[Page H15]]

purposes--through `gotcha' amendments designed to offer 30-second 
attack ads against vulnerable majority lawmakers, or through poison 
pill alternatives designed only to scuttle a bill, not to offer a real 
alternative--it soon will lose its moral high ground for objecting to 
majority restriction on debate and amendments.''
  Mr. Speaker, I finally would like to point out that in this package 
is included H. Res. 5, which is the reauthorization of the Tom Lantos 
Human Rights Commission. The United States must reclaim its moral 
authority on human rights. I am honored to cochair that commission 
along with my good friend Frank Wolf of Virginia, and I look forward to 
working with him and our other Members to advance the cause of human 
rights around the world.
  Again, I want to thank the gentlelady from New York, our 
distinguished Chair of the Rules Committee, for the time.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to my good 
friend from Miami, the hardworking member of the Committee on Rules, 
Mr. Diaz-Balart.
  I will say as I do that, Mr. Speaker, that we would never have 
contemplated denying the then-minority what is being denied us under 
this measure.
  Mr. LINCOLN DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, for 100 years, the 
motion to recommit has really been sacrosanct in this House, and the 
essence of representative democracy is, yes, rule by the majority with 
respect to the rights of the minority.
  Today, history will record that in this rules package by the 
majority, the severe limitation of the right of the minority to offer 
an alternative in legislation, this severe limitation of the motion to 
recommit, is a sad, unfortunate, and wholly unnecessary step that takes 
a very strong, a very significant step toward unaccountability.
  So it is really a sad day for this House, that the House, the 
leadership, the majority leadership, would commence this Congress by 
retrogression, by taking such a significant and unfortunate step 
towards unaccountability, severely limiting the option, the ability of 
the minority to offer an alternative known for 100 years and respected 
in this House as the motion to recommit.

                              {time}  1500

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Castor).
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman, the 
Chair of the Rules Committee, for yielding the time.
  Mr. Speaker, this rules package also contains the first step in the 
march towards economic recovery in that it allows consideration by this 
Congress for the Paycheck Fairness Act and the Lilly Ledbetter Act. We 
are going to reverse a very anachronistic decision by the United States 
Supreme Court relating to job discrimination based on sex. You see, in 
this country, working women are still earning only 78 cents for every 
dollar that a man makes in the same position oftentimes; and despite 
the attempts by this Congress during the 110th Congress, we were unable 
to beat back the opposition of the White House.
  Well, this is a new day and a new direction for America, because now 
we will have someone in the White House who will value equal 
opportunity in employment and education and housing and other fields. 
Indeed, the President-elect has stated that he intends to invite Ms. 
Ledbetter to the White House, and he understands that this bill is part 
of a broader effort to update the social contract, to value equal pay 
for equal work.
  This is something that Congressman Rosa DeLauro, Speaker  Nancy 
Pelosi and Rules Committee Chair Louise Slaughter have fought for year 
after year after year, to realize the economic recovery in our 
households across America, many headed by single women. This is the 
important first step this Congress will take as part of the economic 
recovery and reinvestment.
  Mr. DREIER. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Ms. CASTOR of Florida. I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, let me just say that the spirit of the 
debate here, refusal to yield, is indicative of exactly what this rules 
package consists of.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 2 minutes to our very 
good friend from Springfield, Missouri (Mr. Blunt).
  Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I think we are here today on the minority side as 
perhaps victims of our own success in the last Congress. We clearly 
were able to use this as the only tool that we often had available to 
us, and we used it with great success. We used it with great success 
that didn't destroy the legislative process. In fact, many days the 
legislative process had already been destroyed. There was no committee 
markup. There was no hearing. Often the bills came from somewhere, the 
leader's office, the Speaker's office. We didn't know where they came 
from because we didn't see them until the day they were headed to the 
floor or the day before they were headed to the floor. We weren't given 
amendments, we weren't given substitutes, but we were given 100 years 
ago these tools in the motions to recommit.
  The majority would probably argue that somehow this makes the process 
unworkable. But there are a number of examples in the last Congress 
where the process was very workable.
  The Public Housing Management Act that was brought to the floor 
February 26 by Mr. Sires, Mrs. Bachmann offered a motion to recommit to 
block the Federal Government from restricting possession of otherwise 
legal firearms for these residents. When she offered the motion, the 
bill was pulled. The committee then met, as the motion would have 
required them to do, added that provision to the bill, and brought it 
back to the floor a few days later.
  The AmeriCorps bill to authorize and expand AmeriCorps was considered 
in March of 2008. Mr. Kuhl made a motion to recommit that was prompt in 
nature to prohibit sex offenders and murderers from receiving these 
grants. The bill was pulled. Six days later, the same bill was brought 
up including Mr. Kuhl's language.
  The idea that this ruins the process or the idea that a bill that you 
have never seen before the day it is coming to the floor or the day 
before it is coming to the floor, we don't need to have tools to bring 
new ideas to the floor, is just wrong. I urge that this rules package 
be defeated.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to yield 4 minutes to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank), the chair of the Financial 
Services Committee.
  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The former minority whip has just proved 
the opposite of his case. In the one instance that he refers to where a 
bill came out of the committee which I chair, we were prepared to 
accept that amendment on the floor. It was offered promptly. We asked 
if it could be done, as we often did, as forthwith, and it could have 
been adopted on the floor. In that case it wasn't 6 days, it took 
several weeks, because we cannot drop everything and get to a bill.
  Now, understand that when a bill is sent back to a committee, all the 
rules apply. And, by the way, nothing stops you from making this a 
revolving door, Mr. Speaker. People can keep doing this.
  The motion to recommit, Members have said on the other side they want 
to be able to offer an alternative. Nothing in this proposal in any way 
diminishes their ability to offer an alternative. They are fully able 
to offer an alternative as an amendment. What they will be losing here 
is a legislative Ponzi scheme in which you pretend to be something you 
are not.
  Here is the way it works: If the minority wants under any bill to 
offer a motion to recommit, as the rule will now read if this passes, 
they can offer a motion to recommit with a germane amendment that is 
binding, and if it is adopted, the bill is amended on the spot. But 
they often don't want to do that. Often their amendments are really 
disguises for opposition to the bill in general. So they take an 
amendment that would pass virtually unanimously because it is so 
popular and say it should be done in a way that sends the bill back to 
committee rather than to amend the bill.
  So let's be very clear. Their ability to offer a motion that is an 
amendment

[[Page H16]]

to the bill is in no way diminished by this. It is in no way changed. 
It is exactly the same. What they lose is the ability to take something 
that would pass overwhelmingly if they would allow a serious vote on it 
and use it as a way to get a bill sent back to committee for purposes 
of delay.
  Now, the gentleman is right. It doesn't always work. Sometimes the 
bill survives. Sometimes it doesn't. There is often a traffic jam on 
the floor. There are also cases where timeliness is important, where 
the administration may be about to do something we want to stop them 
from doing and we want to be able to move reasonably quickly.
  I will say this with regard to where he said bills came from nowhere. 
The bills where this tactic, this Ponzi scheme has been used, on bills 
that have come out of the Financial Services Committee, were not those 
bills. They were bills where there had been open amendment processes, 
where I have often gone to the Rules Committee and asked for amendments 
to be in order.
  In fact, in my experience, the committee of jurisdiction leadership 
has no input into these motions. I have asked. There are amendments 
offered on the floor that were never offered in committee when they had 
a chance to be offered, and I will guarantee you that is a fact, 
because the purpose is not to amend the bill. If you were trying to 
amend the bill, you offer the motion to recommit in a way that amends 
it on the floor. That is not good enough for them, because they are not 
interested in substance. They are interested in this game playing and 
this charade--well, it is not a charade, because that is talking. They 
are interested in this pretense whereby you try to slow a bill down 
because you aren't willing to vote against it.
  So if this rules package passes, there will be two options for the 
minority: They can move to send the bill back to committee, that can 
still be done, the motion to send it back to committee will still be 
there; or they can move to amend it on the floor. Their ability to 
offer an alternative is in no ways changed.
  What they can't do is to pretend to be amending the bill by putting 
forward very popular language that would pass overwhelmingly, but doing 
it in a way that in effect sends the bill back to committee which 
doesn't allow the House to adopt that amendment, and then they want to 
be able to say Members weren't in favor of this noncontroversial piece.
  So it is a legislative Ponzi scheme. It is a pretense. It is 
something that ought to be abolished. It does not add at all to the 
legitimacy of debate.
  Let's adopt this rules change. The minority will have the two 
options, and that is all that democracy requires.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes 
to my good friend from Richmond, Virginia (Mr. Cantor), the 
distinguished Republican whip.
  Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, you don't have to look far to see that families across 
this country are gripped with a tremendous amount of fear and 
uncertainty. They fear for their jobs, if they have one. They fear for 
their future as they see their 401(k)s, their college savings accounts 
collapse. They fear that their elected leaders don't get it. They fear 
that this Congress may very well be incapable of change, incapable of 
producing the kind of results that they want and to get it right.
  Under existing House rules, when a bill is brought to the floor that 
includes a tax increase, the minority has a right to offer a motion to 
strike that increase; and the Republican minority had done that on 
nearly half a dozen occasions over the past 2 years.
  With this rule change now, though, House Democrats are trying to push 
through what we Republicans will no longer have, the ability to say 
``no'' to higher taxes. We will not be able to simply strike a tax 
increase and demand an up or down vote. In fact, the only option we 
will have would be to replace one tax increase with another. There will 
be no ability for us to cut taxes to lighten the burden on the middle-
class families that are hurting right now.
  One can see that this rule change makes it a lot easier for the 
Democrat majority to in fact hide tax increases inside other larger 
bills. In fact, that is why all of us are sitting here scratching our 
heads. If the House Democrats feel a tax increase is necessary, then 
why wouldn't they allow for a full and open debate? Why not let the 
American people have a say? Why not let the hardworking people of this 
country hear why Washington is once again looking to take more of their 
hard earned money?
  Either way, what is clear, this type of partisan rules change flies 
in the face of a new era of openness and transparency that President-
elect Obama has promised. I take the President-elect at his word. I 
believe he wants transparency, openness, and debate. I believe he wants 
Washington to begin to do business differently. I believe he is serious 
in wanting Congress to work together for the good of all of our 
constituents. But apparently that word hasn't made its way down to the 
leadership of the House.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes 
to our very good friend from Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin (Mr. 
Sensenbrenner).
  Mr. SENSENBRENNER. I thank the gentleman very much.
  Mr. Speaker, I am beginning my 31st year here, and one of the things 
that I have learned both being in the majority and being in the 
minority is that procedural fairness is the antithesis to partisanship. 
I want to repeat that: Procedural fairness is the antithesis to 
partisanship. This rules package, and particularly the changes in the 
motion to recommit, will bring about more partisanship, and I would ask 
my friends on the majority side to reconsider what they are proposing 
here.
  The previous speakers on the Republican side have stated instances in 
the last 2 years where it has resulted in excessive partisanship 
because of changes that have been made to the motions to recommit on an 
ad hoc basis allowing the majority to pull the bill, their choice, not 
ours, because they set the schedule, not having motions to recommit on 
certain bills and not allowing to strike proposed tax increases.
  What is wrong with debating these issues? And what is wrong if the 
majority of this House of Representatives, which is 21 seats more 
Democratic than the one that just expired, agrees with the Republican 
minority every once in awhile? What are you afraid of? Are you afraid 
of losing a few more motions to recommit? If that is the motivation 
behind this, shame on you, because you are shutting down the process 
and you are going to result in more partisanship, not less. You are 
going to result in having the country even more divided, not less, and 
that goes exactly against what our new President has been trying to do 
with practically everything he said since he won the election 2 months 
ago.


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members are reminded to direct their remarks 
to the Chair.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Frank).

                              {time}  1515

  Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. The gentleman from Wisconsin said, why 
will the majority not in some instances agree with the minority? That's 
the problem. We are talking about cases where we in the majority have 
tried to agree with the minority, and they would not be agreed with. 
They would not take yes for an answer.
  This is the issue: if they offer a motion to recommit and it says 
forthwith, and they win the vote, the bill is amended. If they offer an 
amendment to a bill, not having offered it in committee, not having 
gone to the Rules Committee to ask it to be on the floor, if they take 
a noncontroversial popular issue and offer it as the motion to 
recommit, but say it should be sent to the committee and reported back 
promptly, we have tried to agree with them, and they have refused. This 
literally is a way to not take yes for an answer; it's a way to take 
something to which the majority would like to agree.
  I have been here when I, and when the majority leader has said, in 
such a

[[Page H17]]

situation, could we get unanimous consent to simply agree to that now, 
and the minority has said no.
  Well, people have a right not to be agreed with. People have a right 
not to be agreeable. Some indulge that right more than others. But you 
don't have a right to refuse to be agreed with, and then complain that 
you weren't agreed with. And that's all that's at stake here.
  So, yes, there are times when the majority should say yes to the 
minority, and that should be determined by the floor. What we're saying 
is the minority should not manufacture a situation in which there is no 
way to say yes to them because their goal is patently not to amend that 
particular bill, because if it was, they would accept the request that 
that amendment be accepted. Instead, it is to put a bill back to 
committee because they're afraid to vote against it. That's the issue.
  This is used as a way to send bills back to committee to avoid votes. 
And this leaves, this package, the minority, fully able to offer any 
motion to recommit or send it back to committee. It just says they 
can't play games.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Columbus, Indiana (Mr. Pence), the Chair of the 
Republican Conference.
  (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, the Republican Members of the 111th Congress 
collectively represent more than 100 million constituents in this 
Nation. The changes that are being contemplated by the majority today 
represent an erosion, not of the interests of elected officials, not 
even of the interests of a political party, but, Mr. Speaker, I say 
with respect, it represents an erosion of the interests represented in 
this place of over 100 million Americans.
  As I listen to this debate, I can't help but wonder what our 
constituents who might be looking down from the gallery and looking in 
from elsewhere are thinking. How does this affect them? Instructions 
being promptly or forthwith, motions to recommit.
  But really what we are here to object to in this rule package is 
really the death of democracy in the Democratic Congress. What we do 
not wish to see is a return to the heavy-handed imperial Congress days 
that ruled Capitol Hill for some 40 years. And walking away from the 
provision of the current rules that allows the minority to offer a 
motion to recommit that would be promptly reported back erodes those 
minority interests. Repealing term limits on committee chairmen erodes 
the fundamental principles of reform that the American people voted 
overwhelmingly into this well in 1994.
  And so, as we prepare, 2 weeks from today, to receive a new President 
of the United States of America, as we are just a few hours past 
bipartisan speeches, it is important to know and to remind the American 
people that rules matter. The rules on the back of a box of a board 
game matter, and the rules of the House matter; and they matter because 
they determine whether or not the interest of all Americans will be 
represented in this place.
  And, sadly, we begin this Congress in an inauspicious way, learning 
that change does not equal reform, and I urge that we reconsider this 
rule.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, please let me yield myself 1 or 2 
minutes. One minute, I think, would be sufficient. I hadn't planned to 
do this, but I think the Record requires it.
  I want to quote from three of our Republican Members for whom I have 
great affection and an awful lot of respect. The first one, 
Representative Tom Davis, who is not with us this year, stated the 
minority's intent to use ``promptly'' motions to kill legislation 
during debate on a motion to recommit H.R. 1433, the District of 
Columbia House Voting Rights Act. And let me quote him: ``Let me just 
say to my colleagues, I think the gun ban in the District is 
ridiculous, and would join my colleagues in overturning it. The problem 
is this motion doesn't do that. Instead of bringing it back to the 
floor forthwith for a vote and send it to the Senate, it simply sends 
it back to the committee, essentially killing it.''
  Representative Joe Barton of Texas likened motions to recommit 
promptly to gimmicks during debate on H.R. 3693, the Children's Health 
Insurance Program: ``I will tell my friends on the majority side, it's 
not going to be a gimmick. I think it will say forthwith, which means 
if we adopt it, we vote on it.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I yield myself 30 seconds.
  During the debate on Representative Paul Ryan's motion to recommit on 
H.R. 5501, the Lantos-Hyde HIV/AIDS Act of 2008, Mr. Ryan acknowledged 
that ``promptly'' motions are intended to kill bills. ``This recommit 
motion is not intended to kill the bill. This is a forthwith 
recommit,'' he said.
  I will reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the gentlewoman how many 
speakers she has remaining on her side, and how much time is remaining 
on both sides for this debate?
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I don't have any further requests for time, or at 
least not from anybody who is presently on the floor, so I will reserve 
to close.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question regarding the time remaining 
left for debate, the gentlewoman from New York has 6\1/2\ minutes 
remaining, and the gentleman from California has 10\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I reserve.
  Mr. DREIER. At this time, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my friend 
from San Antonio, Mr. Smith.
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member of the 
Rules Committee for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, congressional Democrats have proposed changing House 
rules on motions to recommit. These changes are not about some arcane 
rule. They are about a pattern of behavior on the part of the Democrats 
that stifles democracy.
  This abuse of power has become a habit with the Democrats. The 
Democrats brought legislation to the floor under closed rules 64 times 
in the last 2 years. This means there was no opportunity to offer 
amendments; 61 bills were brought to the floor with less than 24 hours 
to review the bill text. This breaks the Democrats' commitment to allow 
legislation to be reviewed for 24 hours before a vote.
  House Democrats are discarding one of the Republican minority's only 
tools to help improve bills and promote better legislation, the motion 
to recommit bills promptly. This type of motion to recommit allows a 
majority of the House to say that a bill should be sent back to 
committee for more work.
  For example, last year Republicans used this tool to guarantee second 
amendment rights for the people of the District of Columbia. A majority 
of Members supported this motion and voted to send the bill back to 
committee.
  Why would the Democrats in the future want to ignore the views of a 
majority of House Members?
  Mr. Speaker, changing House rules in a way that silences the voice of 
the people's elected representatives strangles democracy. Democrats 
should reconsider these undemocratic changes to House rules.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 2 minutes 
to the gentleman from Chester Springs, Pennsylvania (Mr. Gerlach).
  Mr. GERLACH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this rules 
package and, instead, to speak in favor of bipartisanship. We are 
living in challenging times, and the American people have grown tired 
of all the partisan bickering that has plagued our body for far too 
long. Our citizens want us to work together to achieve practical and 
realistic solutions for all Americans. Unfortunately, we've wasted 
energy with excessive partisanship in the legislative process that, in 
turn, has led to an inability to achieve fundamental reforms and 
legislative successes.
  We've just witnessed an historic election where the overarching 
message was the message of change. We need to listen to our citizens, 
for they have spoken.
  But the real change that we need is for Democrats and Republicans to 
roll up their sleeves and work together on important legislation such 
as creating jobs, stimulating the economy and increasing the supply of 
American-made energy.
  This week I intend to introduce a resolution that would encourage and 
support bipartisanship in the House. Specifically, the resolution would 
amend

[[Page H18]]

House rules to allow for any amendment to be considered on the floor 
that has at least one Democrat and one Republican sponsor, is submitted 
to the House Rules Committee according to the committee's amendment 
submission deadline, and does not violate any other House rule. By the 
simple fact that it is a joint Democrat and Republican amendment makes 
it bipartisan and, therefore, worthy of floor consideration.
  I am hopeful that our leadership will not only offer support for this 
resolution, but will bring it to the floor of the House, giving all of 
our colleagues the opportunity to debate and discuss its merits.
  While this resolution will not completely solve our problem of 
partisanship, I believe it will be the start of a process to allow us, 
regardless of party, to work together for real legislative successes.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I continue to reserve.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time, I'd like to yield 1 minute to 
the gentleman from Roanoke, Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).
  (Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, I was here in 1994 when the Republicans 
gained the majority in the Congress for the first time in 40 years, and 
remember the reforms that we put into place, term limits on committee 
chairmen where before chairmen who could barely walk into this Chamber 
were serving as Chairs of committees simply because of seniority. Well, 
we've thrown that out today. I guess that's change, but it's really 
change back.
  I was here in 1994, January of 1995, when we changed the rules on 
motions to recommit to make it easier for the minority to offer motions 
to recommit. Well, I guess we've changed that because now you've made 
it more difficult to offer real improvements to legislation by rolling 
back the motion to recommit.
  Yes, we have change in the air, but that change is simply going back. 
This is not progress for this Congress, and I very much regret that the 
Democratic leadership has chosen to curtail the rights of the minority 
and to not bring forward the kind of progress that comes from having 
term limits on committee chairmen.
  The new criteria for determining emergency situations that allow them 
to waive their own PAYGO rules are laughable. The rule appears to be 
that spending can be designated as emergency spending if it is 
necessary, unforeseen, or temporary in nature. I would suspect that the 
majority believes that all of their spending priorities are necessary.
  These rule changes are an abomination, and every taxpayer should be 
up in arms over these changes and the attitudes they represent. It is 
common sense to American families that they cannot spend more than they 
have, and it is unfortunate that common sense seems to elude Congress.
  It is clear that Congress must be forced to address its spending 
addiction. The way to accomplish this is through an amendment to the 
Constitution to require a balanced budget, which I just introduced a 
few minutes ago here today, with more than 115 bipartisan cosponsors.
  These rules are not reforms.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, at this time, let me just inquire of the 
Chair how much time is remaining.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California has 5\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. DREIER. At this time I am happy to yield 1 minute to our great, 
relatively new Member from New Orleans (Mr. Scalise).
  Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, the first vote in this new Congress gives 
us a preview of what the leadership is planning to do, repeal reforms 
that make government more transparent. Over 10 years the House 
established rules that open up the legislative process to make Congress 
more accountable. The rules package we see today undermines the 
accountability we have put in place and encourages the old way of doing 
business with back-room deals and dictator-like authority.
  By ending term limits for committee Chairs, the Democratic majority 
is severely restricting opportunities for all Members, and is 
encouraging dictatorial-like authority. Six-year term limits for 
committee Chairs prevents a dictatorial concentration of power.
  Since 2006, Congress has seen some of the lowest approval ratings in 
history. By giving only a few Members of the House positions of 
permanent power, we are only going to perpetuate that lack of trust.
  Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve better from us on the first 
day of this new Congress. I rise in opposition to these rules changes 
that roll back the clock on important reforms.

                              {time}  1530

  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I continue to reserve.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say that it doesn't 
appear that we have any other speakers on our side.
  Is the gentlewoman prepared to close debate on hers?
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. I am.
  Mr. DREIER. I yield myself the balance of the time.
  Mr. Speaker, we've had a fascinating debate here. I've repeatedly 
asked my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to yield to me so 
that we could engage in an exchange on this, and no one chose to yield 
to me at all, indicating exactly what this rules package is all about. 
We've repeatedly had academics quoted here over the past hour about the 
use of ``promptly'' and the fact that it kills legislation. Time and 
time again from the Chair, the Speaker of the House has ruled that a 
measure that is recommitted to a committee promptly is not killing the 
bill. Until the Chair says that, it is not killing the bill.
  We know that the last Congress was the single-most restrictive, 
closed Congress in the history of the Republic, and it is very, very 
sad to have this sacrosanct right being obliterated that is granted to 
the minority, as Thomas Jefferson outlined in his manual, talking about 
the procedures and the rights that the minority should have. It is 
outrageous in the wake of Barack Obama's pledge to the American people 
that he wanted to have greater transparency and accountability.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, at the conclusion of this debate on the package, 
I'll be offering a motion to commit, which could be the majority's last 
opportunity to freely decide the form of the motion to recommit. 
Included in the motion will be an amendment. This amendment is the 
minority's attempt to restore some of the Obama vision of openness, 
inclusiveness and transparency to the underlying rules package.
  First, it would restore the motion to recommit, which I've discussed. 
It is an important tool that ensures that the minority gets at least 
one chance, one bite at the apple, so that 100 million Americans 
represented by Members of the minority here can be heard.
  Second, it would restore term limits for committee chairmanships.
  Third, it would change committee membership ratios so that all 
committees, except the Rules and Ethics Committees, reflect the ratio 
of Democrats and Republicans in the House. This would help to ensure 
that the 100 million Americans, as I said, who are represented by 
Republicans would have some kind of say in this process.
  Fourth and finally, it would require that all committee votes be 
available online within 48 hours, a proposal from the Republican Study 
Committee.
  At the end of the last Congress, the Appropriations Committee filed 
reports on bills that had been ordered reported months before. The 
public should not have to wait to know how their Member voted in 
committee while committee chairmen dragged their feet. These four 
improvements are about nothing more than exactly what Barack Obama 
talked about--transparency, accountability and fairness.
  Today's historic rules package rolls back reforms made a century ago 
this month by a bipartisan working group of Members rising against the 
repressive rule of Speaker Joe Cannon. Two of the reforms that were 
codified during that historic revolt on opening day in 1909 were a 
motion of recommittal for the minority party and an increased threshold 
to set aside Calendar Wednesday. Ironically, we find ourselves here in 
the same well 100 years

[[Page H19]]

later, fighting to maintain these simple rights and guarantees which 
have for a century, Mr. Speaker, safeguarded this House from the rise 
of another tyrannical Speaker.
  So it is in that light that I ask Members to join me in supporting 
the motion to commit. Let us not undo what has been done. Let us learn 
from our past. Let us move forward with the hope and comity inspired by 
Barack Obama. Let's show the world that, in this House, the democratic 
process is alive and well no matter how large the majority. Vote 
``yes'' on the motion to commit.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, without any question, all of us who serve 
in this House love it. We understand our responsibilities to our 
constituents as well as to this institution. I want to make it 
absolutely clear, unequivocally clear, that no intention here today is 
to in any way impede the minority rights. We will defend them to the 
death.
  But we would have to be Alice in Wonderland, saying that she would be 
able to believe six impossible things before breakfast, if we gave 
serious thought for one moment to the possibility that a motion to 
recommit promptly is anything other than a way to kill a bill.
  What we are trying to do here is to expedite the process to get the 
Obama agenda, which apparently we are in solid agreement on, moved 
forward because the American people are crying out for it. It must be 
done. We want to do this fairly. We want to do this equitably. I hope 
we can do it with minds that meet on all of these subjects, but we must 
remove some of the gimmicks which have done nothing but subvert the 
will of the House.
  So I am really happy to close with this. I hope that everybody in the 
House--all of the new Members whom I congratulate, people who have been 
here for some time and those of us who have been moderately here for a 
long time--will all, please, get together today. There is nothing in 
here that hurts anyone. We are simply attempting to move forward the 
business of the United States of America for which we swore an oath not 
an hour ago.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.


                            Motion to Commit

  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to commit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Dreier moves to commit the resolution to a select 
     committee comprised of the Majority Leader and the Minority 
     Leader with instructions to report the same back to the House 
     forthwith with the following amendments:
       Page 3, strike lines 1 through 13 (relating to terms of 
     committee chairmen) and redesignate subsections (e) and (f) 
     accordingly.
       Page 4, strike lines 13 through 25 (relating to 
     instructions in the motion to recommit) and redesignate 
     succeeding subsections accordingly.
       At the end of section 2, insert the following new 
     subsections:
       (k) Fairness in Committee Ratios.--Clause 5(a)(1) of rule X 
     is amended by inserting the following after the first 
     sentence: ``With respect to all committees other than the 
     Committee on Rules and the Committee on Standards of Official 
     Conduct, the ratio of majority to minority Members serving on 
     such committees shall reflect the ratio of majority to 
     minority Members in the House.''
       (l) Ensuring Transparency in Committee Votes.--Clause 
     2(e)(1)(B)(i) of rule XI is amended to read as follows:

       ``(i) Except as provided in subdivision (B)(ii) and subject 
     to paragraph (k)(7), the result of each such record vote 
     shall be made available by the committee within two business 
     days on the committee's website and for inspection by the 
     public at reasonable times in its offices. Information so 
     available shall include a description of the amendment, 
     motion, order, or other proposition, the name of each member 
     voting for and each member voting against such amendment, 
     motion, order, or proposition, and the names of those members 
     of the committee present but not voting.''.

  Mr. DREIER (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 
that the motion be considered as having been read.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to commit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to commit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 174, 
nays 249, not voting 7, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 3]

                               YEAS--174

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--249

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Melancon
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Minnick
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger

[[Page H20]]


     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Boucher
     Capuano
     Herseth Sandlin
     Pelosi
     Posey
     Solis (CA)
     Towns

                              {time}  1608

  Messrs. BISHOP of New York, MILLER of North Carolina, SPACE, SCHIFF, 
DAVIS of Illinois, HONDA, WEINER, MURPHY of Connecticut, GORDON of 
Tennessee, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Ms. WATSON, Ms. CORRINE BROWN of 
Florida, Mrs. MALONEY, Ms. DeGETTE and Ms. HIRONO changed their vote 
from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Messrs. COLE, DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California, GARRETT of New Jersey, 
AKIN, TIAHRT, BILIRAKIS, SCHOCK, YOUNG of Alaska, SMITH of New Jersey, 
ROHRABACHER, SESSIONS, STEARNS, JONES and Mrs. CAPITO changed their 
vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the motion to commit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 242, 
nays 181, not voting 7, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 4]

                               YEAS--242

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Arcuri
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Barrow
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boren
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Bright
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Childers
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Ellsworth
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Giffords
     Gillibrand
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kratovil
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Marshall
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Space
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NAYS--181

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Baird
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     Linder
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Minnick
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Olson
     Pastor (AZ)
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Roskam
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Waters
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Boucher
     Capuano
     Melancon
     Pomeroy
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Solis (CA)
     Towns


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are less than 2 
minutes remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1631

  Ms. WATERS changed her vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mr. POSEY. Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 4, had I been present, I 
would have voted ``yea.''

                          ____________________