[Congressional Record Volume 168, Number 187 (Friday, December 2, 2022)]
[House]
[Pages H8721-H8723]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
(Mr. SCALISE asked and was given permission to address the House for
1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise for the purpose of inquiring of the
House majority leader the schedule for next week.
But before I yield, I will just say that I know the gentleman from
Maryland, the distinguished majority leader, has recently decided that
he would not seek election to House Democrat leadership.
I know he will be staying in Congress, but I thank the gentleman for
all of his years of service in leadership, which, of course, takes a
lot of extra time, in addition to the general duties of being a Member
of Congress from Maryland, to help run the institution of Congress. He
has served as majority leader, served as whip, served as chair and vice
chair of the Democrat Caucus, and served in many different capacities.
I recognize and thank the gentleman for that service.
I am sure the Appropriations Committee eagerly anticipates his return
there. As I yield, I thank the gentleman for his years of service and
leadership.
I yield to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding and thank
him for his remarks. I will say some other words at a later time, so we
don't prolong this colloquy.
I will say to the gentleman, I have enjoyed being majority leader. I
have enjoyed working with the gentleman, and I look forward to working
in the
[[Page H8722]]
next Congress in a constructive way to try to solve the challenges
confronting our country and giving our people the opportunities that we
want them to have.
I know the gentleman is going to be the majority leader. I will tell
him, I have been the minority whip, and being majority leader is a lot
better. So he is going to enjoy this job. I look forward to working
with him.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
As we look toward next week, we will still have continued colloquies,
at least one more colloquy. I have enjoyed these as well, and we will
have time to talk about that later.
If I could ask about the schedule for next week to the majority
leader.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, let's hope we have just one more colloquy,
maybe not three more colloquies.
On Monday, Mr. Speaker, the House will meet at 12 p.m. for morning
hour and 2 p.m. for legislative business. Members are advised that no
votes are expected in the House on Monday.
On Tuesday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business.
Votes will occur as early as 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday.
The House will recess for the Congressional Gold Medal ceremony to
honor the extraordinary courage and fidelity of the U.S. Capitol Police
and others who protected the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and allowed us
to return to this Chamber to confirm the constitutional duty of
electing the President of the United States.
On Wednesday, the House will meet at 2 p.m. for legislative business.
The 2 p.m. convening time, I want to remind people, is because of the
funeral of our beloved Don McEachin from Virginia, who sadly died after
a long illness. His funeral will be at 11 a.m. in Virginia, and there
will be arrangements for those who want to leave from here to go to the
funeral in Virginia.
On Thursday, the House will meet at 9 a.m. for legislative business.
Next week, the House will consider the Senate amendments to H.R.
8404, the Respect for Marriage Act, which will allow millions of
interracial and same-sex couples to be able to live with greater
certainty knowing their right to equal marriage is enshrined in Federal
law.
The House will also consider Senate amendments to H.R. 7776, the
James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for 2023.
Additionally, the House will consider two important immigration
bills: H.R. 3648, the EAGLE Act, sponsored by Representative Zoe
Lofgren, to phase out the per country cap on employment-based immigrant
visas, with no increase in the total number, and Representative
Takano's H.R. 7946, the Veteran Service Recognition Act.
The House will consider bills under suspension of the rules. The
complete list of suspension bills will be announced by the close of
business today.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, we noticed the Committee on Rules has
scheduled a hearing on Monday for the National Defense Authorization
Act. We still don't have any text for that bill. Obviously, the NDAA is
a very important bill to laying out the priorities for our Nation's
defense, and there has always been a lot of negotiation as it is
leaving the House, as it goes to the Senate, as it has been in this
conference. There are some issues that are well known that have been
debated that, hopefully, will get resolved in that bill, but there is
also talk that there may be non-related issues.
What I would ask is when will we be able to get text on this bill?
The bill is very important to our Nation's defense, but if Members
are going to be asked to vote, maybe early next week on the bill, we
surely wouldn't want a situation where they don't even see the text
until early next week to then be asked to vote on that bill.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I think the gentleman raises an important
point, how much time do people have to read the final product of a
negotiation.
I was hopeful, frankly, that the bill would have been filed today. It
is not ready for filing today because there are still some outstanding
issues. But I have talked to Mr. Smith, the chairman of the committee,
who indicates they are making progress and they are hopeful they can
get this done.
So the Committee on Rules notice is subject obviously to the
completion of negotiations and the filing.
It is not done, not filed today. We need to have it filed as soon as
possible. The conferees are working on getting that.
As the gentleman points out, this bill tends to be, historically on
both sides of the aisle, where we add a lot of things to it, which are
not necessarily directly related but are because this bill is something
that we want to pass and that we do pass--and we will pass this one. It
garners riders, if you will, on the bill.
That is still going on, but I am cognizant, and the gentleman is
correct, we want to have sufficient time for Members to see the bill.
We would like to do this bill next week, if we can, because, as the
gentleman points out, this is about the national security of our
country and our participation in international stabilization efforts
around the world, not the least, of course, is the unprovoked, illegal
war initiated by Mr. Putin in Ukraine. So we are hopeful we can get
this done as soon as possible.
Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I just would strongly encourage that as the
text gets filed, if it is not some time in the next few hours, that
when the gentleman is scheduling the floor vote on that bill, that
there is enough time between when it goes to the Committee on Rules,
when the text is filed, to when the actual vote happens, so Members
have ample time to review the final product.
I yield to the gentleman.
{time} 1100
Mr. HOYER. Yes, I think that is a good point, and we will try to make
sure that happens.
Mr. SCALISE. The final question would be on government funding. We
are hearing there are negotiations. When we talk to appropriators on
our side, they haven't indicated that they have been included in those
negotiations.
Do we know where those negotiations are? Are all sides going to be
included on a final negotiation on how government would be funded for
the remainder of the fiscal year?
I yield.
Mr. HOYER. My expectation is that there would be four-corners
discussion, as we have referred to it, with the Republican and Democrat
House and Senate leaders included in those discussions.
Unfortunately, as you know, the Senate has not passed any
appropriations bills, and there was no agreement on a top line. That
has been the discussion.
The difference, as the gentleman probably knows, is discussions about
what is the top line for defense discretionary and what is the top line
for nondefense discretionary.
As I understand it, the parties have started talking in the Senate on
that issue. We are waiting for, I think, agreement, and hopefully that
agreement will be reached soon, hopefully as soon as perhaps the
beginning of next week because the gentleman is absolutely correct, on
December 16, the authority to fund the government ends, and we are
either going to have to pass a short-term CR, a longer-term CR or, more
preferably, the omnibus.
I will say, as the gentleman knows--he indicated I was returning to
the Appropriations Committee--we talk about a CR adversely affects the
defense, and it does. You can't plan if you are a manager of any of the
programs in the Defense Department. But I would also bring to the
attention of Members, it harms every agency and department of
government because it makes them unable to plan on what resources they
have available to do the work we have asked them to do by law.
A CR is a very clumsy, frankly, admission of failure to get our job
done on time, which I have been very unhappy about for a very, very
long period of time. It is an affliction that affects both sides in
terms of delay. As I say, the Senate, when the Republicans were in
charge, and when the Democrats were in charge, haven't really gotten a
bill to the floor and gotten it passed.
But we are not going to shut down the government, so we will propose
some action which will preclude shutting down the government at
whatever time that action is needed, but I am
[[Page H8723]]
very, very hopeful that we will do an omnibus because an omnibus at
least gives the government and its agencies a year's worth of notice as
to what resources they have to use to accomplish the objectives we have
asked them to.
I wish I had a more specific answer for you, but, as you know, the
negotiations are going on about the top line, and hopefully that will
be resolved relatively soon.
Mr. SCALISE. A broader discussion for another day. Clearly, as we
look at next year, we would hope to pass all 12 appropriations bills
out of the House, but as the gentleman points out, at some point the
Senate is going to have to start moving appropriations bills, too. It
can't just be this game of chicken where the clock is going to strike
midnight and the Senate waits to start doing their job until it is
already the midnight hour as opposed to it would be nice if there was
some kind of shot clock they had after we send them a bill where they
would actually act on that bill so it is not just an onus on the House
to do our job, whether it is a partisan or bipartisan bill, and we have
seen both that come out of the House.
At some point, the Senate has also got to do their job in a
legislative body where you have a House and a Senate, if we are going
to be able to conduct business that is not always waiting until the
midnight hour to finally get a resolution on something as important as
this. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding. The gentleman is
absolutely correct. There is a shot clock. It is September 30 at
midnight. That is the shot clock. That is when government no longer is
funded if we do not take some additional action.
I said to somebody this morning, there are 535 of us. Presumably we
are all adults, presumably we are all rational people. Neither side
would agree that everybody is that. But the fact of the matter is, we
don't do what we know we have to do. You may want to do a lot of
things, and we passed from our perspective very good legislation
through this Congress, but the only thing you have to do is pass the 12
appropriations bills so you can fund the operations of government or
make a decision that you are not going to fund a department, a program,
an activity, whatever. But we don't do that.
We have, unfortunately, the sense that the delay is an acceptable
process, as the gentleman points out. Then you get to the last minute,
a crisis, and then you get a big bill we call the omnibus bill, that
really it is so large and so few people have been participating in the
formulation of that bill that it is unfair to the Members of Congress,
and it is unfair to the American people.
I couldn't agree with the gentleman more that the appropriation
process should be done, my own view is each bill should be considered
individually. The Republicans started the practice, we followed the
same practice of bundling them so we could save time. I look forward to
working with the gentleman. I am going back to the Appropriations
Committee, working with Chair DeLauro and Ranking Member DeLauro on
doing that. But to her credit, all 12 bills were reported out of
committee in a timely fashion, and this is gratuitous--you didn't ask
for this advice--but what I would suggest we should have done if we
could have done it is start the markups in May, pass the bills in June,
send them to the Senate, and have July and August and September to
resolve differences between the two, and pass the bills by September
30. That is what we ought to do, I agree with the gentleman. It is an
objective that we ought to try to attain.
Mr. SCALISE. I share the gentleman's concerns there. One of the
reasons we put the calendar out for next year this early and built time
in during those months before the summer so that there is ample time to
get all 12 appropriations bills through the House, give the Senate time
to do the work well in advance of the deadline, and then at some point
the onus has to be on them to do the job they have to do before the
midnight hour. I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. HOYER. One of the things--I have been on the Appropriations
Committee; I was on it for 23 years before I took leave--we had actual
conferences, Senators and House Members on the two subcommittees came
together, discussed differences, tried to resolve those differences.
That essentially does not exist any longer, and it is not healthy, I
think, for the institution.
Mr. SCALISE. It is a good suggestion and something we can get back
to, hopefully, in the new year, try to make this process work better. I
appreciate the suggestion.
Again, we will have this conversation more next week. Mr. Speaker, I
yield back the balance of my time.
____________________