[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9459-9460]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1555, INTELLIGENCE AUTHORIZATION 
                        ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call 
up House Resolution 167 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 167

       Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this 
     resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 
     XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 
     Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 
     the bill (H.R. 1555) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2000 for intelligence and intelligence-related 
     activities of the United States Government, the Community 
     Management Account, and the Central Intelligence Agency 
     Retirement and Disability System, and for other purposes. The 
     first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. General 
     debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one 
     hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and 
     ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee on 
     Intelligence. After general debate the bill shall be 
     considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall 
     be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
     of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the 
     nature of a substitute recommended by the Permanent Select 
     Committee on Intelligence now printed in the bill. The 
     committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be 
     considered by title rather than by section. Each title shall 
     be considered as read. Points of order against the committee 
     amendment in the nature of a substitute for failure to comply 
     with clause 7 of rule XVI are waived. No amendment to the 
     committee in the nature of a substitute shall be in order 
     except those printed in the portion of the Congressional 
     Record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule XVIII 
     and except pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. 
     Each amendment so printed may be offered only by the Member 
     who caused it to be printed or his designee and shall be 
     considered as read. The chairman of the Committee of the 
     Whole may: (1) postpone until a time during further 
     consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a 
     recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five 
     minutes the minimum time for electronic voting on any 
     postponed question that follows another electronic vote 
     without intervening business, provided that the minimum time 
     for electronic voting on the first in any series of questions 
     shall be 15 minutes. At the conclusion of consideration of 
     the bill for amendments the Committee shall rise and report 
     the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 
     adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House 
     on any amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the 
     bill or to the committee amendment in the nature of a 
     substitute. The previous question shall be considered as 
     ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage 
     without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with 
     or without instructions.

                              {time}  1100

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rogers). The gentleman from Florida (Mr. 
Goss) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, for purposes of debate only, I yield the 
customary 30 minutes to my colleague and friend, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Frost), pending which I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is 
for the purpose of debate on this issue only.
  Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 167 is a modified open rule providing 
for the consideration of H.R. 1555, the Intelligence Authorization Act 
for fiscal year 2000. What makes the rule modified is the requirement 
that Members wishing to offer amendments were asked to have them 
preprinted in the Congressional Record prior to the consideration of 
this bill by the House. Notice of this restriction was given to Members 
last week prior to the filing of the report on this bill, and at the 
time of the filing, when we asked for the UC, we also reminded Members 
of the requirement.
  This requirement makes good sense, given the unique nature of the 
matters

[[Page 9460]]

covered by the bill. In the past, we have found it works well to allow 
the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence the opportunity to 
review potential amendments ahead of time in order to work with Members 
to ensure that no classified information is inadvertently disclosed 
during our floor debate. This is not about shutting out any debate on 
the bill but, rather, about an extra degree of caution and making sure 
sensitive material is properly protected.
  As is customary, the rule provides 1 hour of general debate divided 
equally between the chairman and the ranking member, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Dixon), of the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence. The rule makes in order the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute recommended by the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence as an original bill for the purpose of amendment. The 
amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered by title, 
and each title shall be considered as read.
  The rule further waives points of order against the amendment in the 
nature of a substitute for failure to comply with clause 7 of Rule XVI, 
which prohibits nongermane amendments. This is necessary because, 
again, the introduced bill was more narrow in scope, as it usually is, 
than the product reported out by the committee.
  Specifically, this provision in the rule pertains to title V of the 
reported bill regarding the Freedom of Information Act exemption for 
the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, NIMA, which is, I believe, a 
noncontroversial provision which makes a technical correction.
  As I mentioned earlier, the rule makes in order only those amendments 
that have been preprinted in the Congressional Record and provides that 
each amendment that has been so printed may be offered only by the 
Member who caused it to be printed or his designee. Each amendment 
shall be considered as read.
  The rule allows the Chair of the Committee of the Whole to postpone 
votes during consideration of the bill and to reduce voting time to 5 
minutes on a postponed questioned, if a vote follows a 15-minute vote. 
Nothing new there.
  Finally, the rule provides the traditional motion to recommit with or 
without instructions. Again, a guarantee for the minority.
  Mr. Speaker, this is certainly a fair rule and one without any 
controversy that I am aware of, but I am aware that the ranking member, 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Dixon), my colleague, friend and 
close working partner on the Permanent Select Committee on 
Intelligence, had hoped that we could delay consideration of this bill 
until next week, to give Members even more time to familiarize 
themselves with the provisions of this bill, especially its classified 
components. I know that every effort was made to be sensitive to his 
request. I agreed with it. But given forces beyond any one Member's 
control, particularly relating to other legislation that is still under 
discussion, we in fact were asked to be on the floor with this bill 
today.
  That said, I encourage Members to vote for this fair rule and to 
support the underlying legislation, which I think is well prepared.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule providing for the 
consideration of H.R. 1555, the Intelligence Authorization for fiscal 
year 2000. I would, however, like to make the House aware of the 
concerns raised by the ranking member of the Permanent Select Committee 
on Intelligence with respect to the timing of the consideration of this 
bill and the preprinting requirement for amendments.
  The gentleman from California (Mr. Dixon) does not oppose the 
preprinting of amendments for this bill. And, in fact, Mr. Speaker, the 
gentleman is generally supportive of such a requirement because of the 
sensitive nature of much of the bill and the need to protect its 
classified contents. And, in fact, Mr. Speaker, the House has 
considered intelligence authorizations under this kind of rule for the 
past 6 years. What concerns the gentleman from California, as well as 
the Democrats on the Committee on Rules, is the timing of the 
consideration of this important legislation.
  Since the House conducted no business on Monday, few Members were 
here to read the classified portions of the bill in order that they 
might determine if any amendments might be appropriate. Mr. Speaker, we 
do not object to this rule, only to the timing of the consideration of 
the bill and would, as has the gentleman from California, ask that the 
leadership consider giving Members ample time in the future to examine 
this legislation prior to its consideration on the floor.
  Mr. Speaker, the bill itself is not controversial and was, in fact, 
reported by a unanimous vote. The funding levels in the bill are 
approximately 1 percent above the administration request for the 
activities of the intelligence community, but the committee bill 
focuses on the future needs of our intelligence capabilities and the 
priorities associated with those needs in a rapidly changing but 
increasingly dangerous world.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend my colleague from Florida (Mr. Goss) for his 
work on this important matter.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Traficant).
  Mr. TRAFICANT. Mr. Speaker, I have one concern with the bill. 
However, I will support the bill and I want to commend the efforts of 
the authors of the bill.
  I have been concerned about a massive trade deficit in America, and I 
am concerned about espionage as far as it relates to our patents, our 
technology, our industry, and our trade secrets. And with that, I would 
like to see that we can buoy up this bill in that particular regard.
  I would like the Members of Congress to realize that there is a 
projected $250 billion trade deficit this year. Japan and China are 
taking $5 billion apiece, $10 billion a month out of our economy, or a 
quarter of a trillion dollars a year.
  I am pleased that the committee will work with me on this issue, and 
I want to thank our distinguished leader from Texas for yielding me 
this time.
  Mr. FROST. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I urge favorable consideration of this 
resolution to support this fair bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the 
previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________