[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 14]
[House]
[Pages 18698-18707]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE--MANNER OF CONDUCTING MARKUP OF LEGISLATION IN 
                      COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, under rule IX, I rise to a question of the 
privileges of the House, and I offer a resolution (H. Res. 324) and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 324

       Whereas during a meeting of the Committee on Ways and Means 
     on July 18, 2003, for the consideration of the bill H.R. 
     1776, the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means offered 
     an amendment in the nature of a substitute;
       Whereas during the reading of that amendment the chairman 
     of the Ways and Means Committee directed majority staff of 
     the committee to ask the United States Capitol Police to 
     remove minority-party members of the committee from a room of 
     the committee during the meeting, causing the United States 
     Capitol Police thereupon to confront the minority-party 
     members of the committee;
       Whereas pending a unanimous-consent request to dispense 
     with the reading of that amendment the chairman deliberately 
     and improperly refused to recognize a legitimate and timely 
     objection by a member of the committee: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That the House of Representatives disapproves of 
     the manner in which Representative Thomas conducted the 
     markup of legislation in the Committee on Ways and Means on 
     July 18, 2003, and finds that the bill considered at that 
     markup was not validly ordered reported to the House.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, the resolution 
constitutes a question of the privileges of the House.
  The minority leader, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi), 
will be recognized for 30 minutes; and the gentleman from Louisiana 
(Mr. McCrery) will be recognized for 30 minutes as the designee of the 
Speaker.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it is my duty as the House Democratic leader to offer 
this resolution. Earlier today the Committee on Ways and Means 
Democrats were subjected to an indignity, an indignity that no Member 
should have to endure.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.
  Ms. PELOSI. I do not yield, Mr. Speaker. I do not yield, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The House will be in order.
  Mr. HOYER. The minority leader is speaking, Mr. Speaker.


                             point of order

  Mr. McCRERY. Point of order, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Does the gentlewoman yield for the 
parliamentary inquiry?
  Ms. PELOSI. I do not yield, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. For the parliamentary inquiry?
  Ms. PELOSI. I do not yield. There is half an hour on the other side. 
They have plenty of time to make their point.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman will suspend.
  The gentleman will state his point of order.
  Mr. McCRERY. The majority has not been supplied with a copy of the 
resolution, Mr. Speaker; and it is hard for us to proceed without a 
copy of the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will supply copies, but the 
gentleman has not stated a point of order. The resolution has been 
read.
  Mr. McCRERY. I thank the Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Pelosi), the minority leader, will proceed.
  Ms. PELOSI. I will proceed, Mr. Speaker, but not before saying that I 
do not appreciate the gentleman trivializing a rare occasion of this 
House when a leader of a party stands up for a point of privilege on 
the House floor. If the gentleman wanted a copy of the resolution, he 
knew he could go right to the well and get it at the desk.

[[Page 18699]]

  Now I would like to proceed. Earlier today, the Committee on Ways and 
Means Democrats were subjected to an indignity, an indignity that no 
Member should have to endure; but it appears that indignity is the 
order of the day on the majority side.
  As the Democratic Members of the Ways and Means Committee were 
caucusing in a committee room while a bill was being read for 
amendment, the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means summoned the 
Capitol Police to remove them from that room. Make no mistake about 
this: the police were summoned to remove these Democratic Members 
because the chairman did not want them in the room, not for any other 
reason. The facts could not be clearer.
  As the Democratic Members of the Committee on Ways and Means were 
leaving the rostrum to caucus prior to other events, the chairman told 
his staff to call the police. How outrageous.
  I will not even go into how the markup was conducted; I will leave 
that to the members of the Committee on Ways and Means. I will not talk 
about the fashion in which the Chair rammed through the reporting of 
the legislation; the members of the Committee on Ways and Means will do 
that. I want to focus on how the chairman can call upon the Capitol 
Police to evict Members at his whim from the committee space. We cannot 
let this stand. We cannot let this go unchallenged. Mr. Speaker, this 
resolution recites the facts, and my colleagues have heard them.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from 
New York (Mr. Rangel), the very distinguished ranking member of the 
Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I would hope that this discussion at the end 
of the day would tend to bring more civility to the relationship 
between the minority and the majority Members. We can continue the 
animosity. We can continue the ill feelings. But this would not serve 
our Nation well, and it certainly should not make Democrats or 
Republicans more proud to be a Member of this august body. We should be 
proud when we differ when we debate; but once we start eroding and 
abusing the powers of the majority, we do not do it for this Congress, 
but we do it for the Congress that follows. We do not have that right. 
No one person has the right to take away the rights that have been 
given to us by the Constitution in this great Nation.

                              {time}  1330

  Last night, just before midnight, a substitute pension bill was 
filed. After midnight, its description was filed. The underlying bill 
was a $230 billion bill of 207 pages. The substitute was a $50 billion 
bill and 90 pages. Members of our committee, Democratic members and I 
would suspect Republicans as well, had no clue as to the fact that this 
was coming up on a Friday; and when it did come up, we did not have 
time to read to see what were the major differences between the 
substitute and the underlying bill.
  When the chairman of the committee asked for unanimous consent to 
waive the reading of the substitute, I objected and there was some 
discussion, but I maintained the objection because the Chair really had 
made up his mind that he was going to move forward with that 
legislation.
  After talking with some of the senior members of the minority, we 
decided that we had go to the library. This library has been used 
historically since I have been on that committee for discussions with 
majority, minority, collectively. It has been used by the Trade Caucus, 
Republicans and Democrats. It is a beautiful place right behind our 
beautiful hearing room.
  We went back there just to discuss what was in the substitute and how 
we would handle it. We were not there, I want to emphasize that all of 
these things are recorded because the time factor is so essential. I 
was not in that room 2 minutes when I was approached by the chairman's 
chief of staff who asked me and the Democrats to leave the library. I 
asked why. She told me because the chairman wanted to use the library 
for the Republican members. I asked her to advise the Chair that we 
were not leaving.
  It was less than 3 minutes that a House Capitol policeman came and 
said that a disturbance has been reported. All of the Democrats were in 
the library at this time with the exception of the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Stark) who was outside to make certain that if there 
was an attempt to waive the rules, the reading of the substitute, that 
he could object.
  The police officer asked us to leave because he was reported that 
there was a disturbance. I asked what did he intend to do because we 
were not leaving. He said he would report to his superior.
  In less than 3 minutes a lieutenant came of the Capitol policemen. I 
asked him why was he there, and he stated because the patrolman had 
received this message, and he had received notice that he was to remove 
us. I told him what I told the police officer, that we had decided 
collectively that we would not be moved, and I asked what they intended 
to do. He said that he had to get a better reading of this from the 
Sergeant of Arms.
  The Sergeant of Arms came and said he was advised by the Capitol 
Police that the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means asked that 
we be removed from the room. I said we would not be removed, and the 
Sergeant of Arms said that he thought that was an issue to be resolved 
by Members of Congress and members of the committee.
  I suggest to you that once we start taking away the privacy of 
Members, the privacy of members of the committee the privilege to use 
space that is there for the sole purpose of us to deliberate, then it 
is a situation that effects not me, not the Democrats on the Committee 
on Ways and Means, not the Democrats and Republicans in this House of 
Representatives, but it effects this institution.
  We should not allow the abuse of power or personalities to interfere 
with the responsibilities we have. We have a responsibility to pass 
this Congress, certainly, if not in better shape, than in no worse 
shape than the great institution that we inherit it.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I should begin by apologizing to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Pelosi), the minority leader. I probably should not 
have interrupted her. She, due her to her long service in this House 
and certainly as a minority leader, deserves the respect of all Members 
on both sides and I certainly did not mean to show disrespect. I was 
merely trying to get a copy of the resolution. Perhaps I should have 
known to go down to the well and request one rather than interrupting 
the gentlewoman, and I apologize.
  With respect to the matter at hand, it is unfortunate that we are 
here this afternoon debating this motion. The events which led to the 
introduction of this proposal are indeed unfortunate. Our view, and 
certainly my view, of the events as they were seen and understood by me 
differ substantially from those presented by the minority.
  First of all, with respect to the rules being followed by the 
committee, by the majority, by the chairman, it is clear that no rules 
were violated in terms of our presenting to the minority the underlying 
bill which was introduced in April of this year, nor was it a violation 
of the rules in terms of the timing with which we gave the minority a 
copy of the chairman's substitute to the underlying bill. In fact, that 
chairman's substitute was delivered to the minority the night before 
the mark-up. There is no requirement in the rules that the chairman's 
substitute be given to the minority at any certain time prior to the 
mark-up. So the majority and the chairman lived up to the rules of the 
House in getting to the mark-up today.
  Now, what transpired at the mark-up is, again, unfortunate. The 
minority chose for whatever reason to object to a unanimous consent 
request that the bill be considered as read so that the committee might 
undertake an explanation of the bill and proceed to questions on the 
bill. That is an extraordinary objection. It has never been made in my 
time that I can recall on

[[Page 18700]]

the committee. And, in fact, when we were in the minority on that 
committee, we did not even have legislative language at the Committee 
on Ways and Means. We marked up by concept. So I did not really 
understand the reason, the rationale for the objection of the minority 
member to waive the reading of the bill.
  And as all of you know, had the minority insisted and had the bill 
been read in its entirety, we would have wasted a lot of time in 
committee today. In fact, when the bill began to be read line by line 
by the head of the Joint Committee on Taxation, the entire membership 
on the minority party stood up and walked out of the mark-up except for 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark).
  So if the intent of the minority had been to gain an understanding of 
the bill through a reading of the bill, it would make sense that they 
would at least remain and hear the reading of the bill. So I think one 
can conclude that their intent was not really to gain an understanding 
of the bill but to cause disruption in the mark-up of the committee.
  After the Democratic members left the room, the hearing room, left 
one of their members at the dias, there transpired more than one 
exchange between the minority member and majority members of the 
committee, culminating in a manner exhibited by the minority member 
which in my view warranted the chairman of the committee calling the 
Sergeant at Arms to preserve order in the committee; and I believe that 
is the reason the Sergeant at Arms was called and rightly so.
  After the Sergeant at Arms and the police arrived at the committee to 
preserve order, it is true they did go back to an ante-room of the 
hearing room we call the library and discussed with the minority a 
request that they move to another office. I do not know exactly what 
got the Capitol Police and the Sergeant at Arms to go back there, 
because I was not privy to that. However, I was privy to the chairman 
only minutes after the police and the Sergeant at Arms had gone to the 
library, instructing the staff to go back to the library and tell the 
police, the Sergeant at Arms that it was all right if the minority 
remained in the library, and I believe that instruction was given.
  Bottom line, Mr. Speaker, I do not believe there is any basis for the 
resolution that is before us, certainly no basis on which a Member of 
this House would vote to approve this resolution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Rangel).
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, we are not going to have much of a dispute 
here. First of all, we were not saying that the majority violated any 
rules by giving us the substitute 2 minutes before midnight and the 
description right after midnight. That is your prerogative to do. We 
think it is wrong. We are not charging you with violating rules. And 
the time fact as to when we got up to leave, yes, we did. We had to 
decide what we were going to do, and we did get up and leave the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) behind.
  The question is, did the chief of staff come as soon as we got up and 
say that the Chair told us to leave the room? And even though you may 
not know who directed the sergeant, the police to take us out of the 
room, the record will show they received a call and they know who they 
received it from. It was from the chief of staff from the Committee on 
Ways and Means or someone saying they were speaking for the chief, and 
it was after that that the police came.
  I do not know whether the chairman rescinded the direction to kick us 
out of the room, but what we are saying today is that that never should 
have happened. That room belongs to us just as much as it belongs to 
the Republicans. So we are not arguing with you about violating the 
rules, but when we objected, that is the only thing that we have. We 
used the tools that we have. We did not give you unanimous consent to 
have the substitute to be considered. You may call it a waste of time. 
We call it our constitutional prerogative.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Shaw), a member of the committee.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, so what? I mean, so far, we have had a 
discussion of he said, who said, cops came, Sergeant of Arms was 
called, these types of things, but let us look at the resolution.
  The resolution says that the House of Representatives disapproves the 
manner in which the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) conducted 
the mark-up of legislation in the Committee on Ways and Means on July 
18, 2003, and find that the bill considered at that mark-up was not 
validly ordered reported to the House. Well, I think it is important 
that we talk about what happened.

                              {time}  1345

  The only thing that was in dispute is, and that I can see here is, to 
whether a timely objection was made to dispense with the reading of the 
bill itself, and the Democrats or the minority party were all back in 
the library with the exception of one; and he was engaged in a 
conversation with the staff when the motion was made, and at that time, 
the chairman said, Hearing no objection, it is considered as read and 
open for amendment at any time.
  With that, the lone minority Member in the room got up and left. At 
that time, the chairman yielded the floor to the main sponsor of the 
bill, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), on the majority side. The 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) then proceeded to describe the bill 
and talk about the bill for a number of minutes, for a long period of 
time, at which time the minority party had plenty of time to come back 
into the room, but they had all left.
  Now, if you were to say that this was an improperly crafted, 
improperly passed bill, then all the minority has to do at any time is 
to get up and leave the room. There was clearly a quorum in the room. 
The bill was called up and it was voted upon. That is what we are here 
to decide.
  Now, if we are to decide personalities, then this is not the place 
for it. As a matter of fact, our rules of the House decorum says that 
we are not supposed to get involved in that, but we could get involved 
in it for a long time, for a lot of Members; and we cannot do that 
because of the decorum of this House of Representatives.
  My friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), and he is my 
friend, he objected that the minority has the right to use any of the 
rooms, just as the majority does. I am sorry, that is not the way the 
rules of the House are written. The gentleman from California (Mr. 
Thomas) controls those rooms, but that is not what is complained about 
here.
  What is complained about here and what we are here to debate today is 
whether or not there was a proper handling of the rules with regard to 
the legislation itself, the legislation itself. There is a lot of blame 
to go around.
  I quite frankly, prior to the start of this hearing, I tried to get 
the Speaker or somebody to try to work this out so this thing could be 
defused over the weekend. It desperately needs defusing.
  The Committee on Ways and Means is one of the premier, if not the 
premier, committees within this House of Representatives. We do need to 
work on some decorum within the committee; we know that. It is the 
premier committee in the House of Representatives.
  Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. SHAW. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.
  Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, would the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) 
care to share with the House your view on a Member of the Committee on 
Ways and Means calling the Capitol Police on other duly elected Members 
of Congress? That is one of the----
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would say to the 
gentleman, I was sitting there right next to the chairman. The minority 
Member that was sitting there alone, the only one in there, physically 
threatened a majority Member.

[[Page 18701]]


  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, now to speak to this resolution, the 
objection of which is that the office of the chairman of the Committee 
on Ways and Means called the police on the Democratic Members who were 
assembling in a room, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).
  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me, if I might, first correct, I think, 
a couple of the factual issues.
  I can assure you that the Democratic Members wanted to participate in 
the debate on the pension legislation. In fact, when the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Portman) was debating the issue, we were confronting the 
Capitol Police, and that was the reason why we were not back in the 
room. By the time we finished with the Capitol Police, the markup was 
over.
  Let me also point out that the police were called before the 
gentleman from California's (Mr. Stark) episode began. We were 
confronted with the Capitol Police before the unanimous consent request 
was brought forward.
  Mr. Speaker, I started this day looking forward to the committee 
markup on H.R. 1776. That is a bill that I have worked on with the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) for many months. We have worked with 
the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means. We have worked with 
Members on both sides of the aisle on that legislation. It is important 
legislation to working people of this country, and there are different 
views among Democrats on provisions in that legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I could defend that bill on its merit, and I look 
forward to doing just that, but I cannot defend the manner in which our 
committee acted this morning.
  I have devoted much of my public career to process issues. I have 
served on the ethics committee for over 6 years, and I have served as a 
cochair of our ethics task force. I am a former speaker of the Maryland 
legislature. Process is important in what happened in the Committee on 
Ways and Means this morning. Mistakes were made, and it reflects badly 
on each one of us. We need to move forward, but to move forward we must 
acknowledge our mistakes.
  H.R. 1776 desperately needs to be considered in a fair manner before 
the Committee on Ways and Means for its integrity and integrity of the 
process.
  It is the committee's responsibility to guarantee to the public that 
a fair process is used, order is maintained, and each Member's right is 
protected. That is our collective responsibility.
  Mr. Speaker, since this morning I have talked to Members on both 
sides of the aisle, and I am pleased that the Speaker's on the floor 
listening to this debate. I think it is absolutely essential, and I 
know I am supported by both Democrats and Republicans, that H.R. 1776 
be returned to the Committee on Ways and Means for a full markup, with 
opportunity of all Members to participate. As one of the principal 
sponsors, I hope that will be accomplished and we will be able to have 
a full markup on that legislation.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Before I yield to the gentleman from Colorado, I would point out that 
the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, as the chairman of any 
standing committee, has the prerogative to call the Sergeant at Arms to 
maintain order in his committee, and that was the basis of the 
chairman's call for the Sergeant at Arms.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. 
McInnis), a member of the committee.
  Mr. McINNIS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by saying, with all 
due respect to my colleague, whose comments we have just heard, a lot 
of those comments I happen to agree with; but with due respect, you 
were not in the room at the time that an incident occurred not dealing 
with process but dealing with order in the committee; and with all due 
respect to your fellow colleagues, with the exception of one, the rest 
of you were all out of the room in another room. That particular 
individual was not arguing process. In fact, that particular individual 
threatened me with physical harm.
  Now, fellow colleagues of mine realize that I like engagement, but it 
was clear there was going to be fairly prompt disorder beyond the 
magnitude that was probably originally anticipated when a member of the 
minority committee made his first comments. I think it was entirely 
appropriate, entirely appropriate, with considering my own actions, I 
think it was entirely appropriate for the chairman of that committee to 
call the Sergeant at Arms and the Capitol Police so that order in the 
committee could be maintained.
  I think this discussion about process at midnight or process of when 
the police were in the library is all, and I am not saying this in a 
derogatory fashion, but is all diversionary from the fact that we were 
within moments, frankly myself and another Member on your side of the 
aisle, were within moments of, I would guess, a physical engagement; 
and I considered that threat serious. I considered the bodily threat 
not just to the order of the committee but to me, and I fully intended 
to defend myself.
  So to calm this down, I know that is the purpose of why the chairman 
had done that, and I think any one of you in the same exact position 
that that chairman was in would have done exactly the same thing.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a member of the 
Committee on Ways and Means, one of the people who was evicted from the 
room.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LEVIN. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere belief that at the end of 
the day we will all be reading from the same page.
  In order for us to really resolve this issue, truth has to prevail. I 
suggest to the majority that we will be referring to the timing of the 
telephone calls, which is recorded. No one is going to dispute in this 
House that the police were called and they arrived in the library prior 
to the time that the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) and members 
of the majority had any problem. I repeat, the police were called and 
arrived, and I am referring to the time clock and the record. So that 
is all I have to say about this. Whether they should have been called 
and they were not called to stop any disturbance, they were called to 
get us out of that room.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, indeed, the gentleman from California's (Mr. 
Thomas) chief of staff stood nearby where we were meeting with a member 
of the Capitol Police and said this to the police and at least one 
member of the staff, that the chairman has asked me to get the police 
to remove Democrats from this room.
  This is the United States of America. This is not a police state. 
This is supposed to be the people's House, and you call members of the 
police to evict us from having a discussion. We were discussing that 
bill that we had only seen a few minutes before, because it was 
delivered at midnight, delivered at midnight and maybe the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Thomas) and the rest of you did not like our 
insisting that the bill be read; but the rules say that we have the 
right to have a bill read word for word, and you have no right to 
trample, once again, on the rights of the minority of the United States 
House of Representatives.
  That is what is at stake here, and you can try to change the subject. 
You can try to gloss over it. You can try to make excuses. You can try 
to say the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) said such and such to 
so and so. No, the issue, this is not a partisan squabble. This is not 
a matter of personality. This is a matter of our basic rights as 
representatives of the people of the United States; and darn it all, we 
are going to stand here and stand here to defend not only our rights 
but the rights of the people of the United States of America.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself so much time as I may 
consume.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, none of us, at least who have spoken here 
on

[[Page 18702]]

the floor, knows who told who what when; but I do know, I do know that 
I was told by a member of the staff, the majority staff of the 
Committee on Ways and Means, that that staff person went back to the 
library, which is the room in question, it is not the hearing room, 
that the Democrats were asked to move from. It was the library and 
prior to the Sergeant at Arms and the police getting there, the staff 
person went back and notified the minority that that room was to be 
used during the markup, it was reserved, and they would have to move to 
1129, which is another Ways and Means room just down the hall.

                              {time}  1400

  So I want everyone to know that that transpired before the Sergeant 
at Arms and the police got to the library to ask the minority to move 
out of that room.
  So I think what we have here, in total, to support this proposal, 
this resolution, is a very short period of time, minutes, during which 
the Sergeant at Arms, the Capitol police were told by someone to remove 
the Democrats from the library to another room, to another Ways and 
Means room; and very shortly after the Capitol police, Sergeant at Arms 
arrived in the library, the chairman of the committee, in my presence, 
directed the staff to go back and tell the police and the Sergeant at 
Arms that it was all right for the minority to use the library.
  So even if it was the chairman who directed, ordered the police and 
the Sergeant at Arms to the library specifically to tell the Democrats 
to move out of that room, it would have been a mistake that was 
corrected almost immediately by the chairman. And for that you bring a 
resolution to the floor of the House? I think that those who would do 
this might have a bad memory with respect to their own actions at times 
during their lives and wish that their actions would not be judged so 
harshly for so short a period of time.
  So, insofar as any other basis for this resolution, as I have pointed 
out, there is no basis for determining that the committee was out of 
order or acted contrary to the rules of the House.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I will make an inquiry about the remaining 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentlewoman 
from California (Ms. Pelosi) has 14 minutes remaining, and the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery) has 13 minutes remaining.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
just make note of the fact that the gentleman from Louisiana has just 
stipulated to the facts that the police were called to go to the 
library to evict the Democratic Members from that room.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Rangel).
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, we are getting closer to the truth. And if 
what the majority is saying is that somehow the chairman recognized 
that what he did was wrong and rescinded that, we in that room had no 
idea that it was rescinded. The police had us in that room. They sent 
for their superior, and they sent for the Sergeant of Arms. The same 
person who came to tell us that the chairman wanted us to leave could 
have very easily come into that room and said that the chairman had 
changed his mind. That did not happen.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), a member of the committee.
  Mr. HAYWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the resolution and 
I do so understanding that people of goodwill can and often do 
disagree. I realize also that frustrations abound, indeed, as a private 
citizen reading of certain machinations that went on in this House when 
roles were reversed.
  But that is not the subject here today. The subject here today is, 
was the chairman within his rights when order was threatened in the 
committee to call the Sergeant at Arms? In other words, a test of what 
is reasonable.
  Mr. Speaker, were I in the Chair at the time when order was 
disrupted, when a physical threat was issued by a member of the 
minority party, and parliamentary rules preclude me from naming that 
Member, although I can say it was a very stark picture of a 
confrontation, you better believe, Mr. Speaker, I would have called the 
Sergeant at Arms to restore order.
  Reject the resolution. It is dead wrong and a disservice to the 
House.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
note that, unfortunately, the gentleman did not hear the stipulation to 
the fact that the police were called before any conversations took 
place between those individuals, and they were called to evict the 
Democratic members from the hearing room.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Matsui).
  Mr. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the Democratic leader for yielding 
me this time.
  It is really unfortunate what is going on here. My colleague on the 
Democratic side of the aisle, his reputation is being besmirched in 
order to avoid the real issue, and I think it is really outrageous that 
the gentleman from Louisiana is doing this.
  This is not about the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), because 
the Capitol police came to visit us, and I was in that room in the 
library behind the Committee on Ways and Means hearing room, before the 
completion of the reading of the bill was going on. That was before the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) and the gentleman from Colorado 
(Mr. McInnis) had even their discussion; and, as a result of that, the 
Capitol police were called before the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Stark) had even said anything.
  As a result of that, what the gentleman is doing to the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Stark) is doing major damage to his credibility at 
the same time when the real fault is the chairman of the Committee on 
Ways and Means. He called the Capitol police. And, frankly, when later 
on the Sergeant of Arms came in himself, he said, he said to all of us, 
he said I was called, we were called because there was a disturbance. 
There was a disturbance back here in this room, and we were asked to 
remove all of you.
  This was not about the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark). This 
was about removing Members on the Democratic side of the aisle on the 
Committee on Ways and Means from a room that was not being used because 
the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means just decided to lose 
his temper on the situation. I think it is really outrageous. We ought 
to debate the issues. We ought not to try to point the finger at 
somebody who was innocent in this discussion.
  I really think it is really outrageous. I think the gentleman from 
Louisiana owes the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) an apology by 
trying to make the issue about him rather than about the chairman of 
the committee.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I would tell my friend from California (Mr. Matsui) that he was not 
in the hearing room and, therefore, he cannot speak with any authority 
about the time line within which events transpired. I was in the 
hearing room. I know that the behavior of the minority prior to the 
completion of the reading of the bill warranted the Sergeant at Arms 
being called. So I would caution the gentleman not to make absolute 
statements which he cannot back up with any certainty.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington 
(Ms. Dunn).
  Ms. DUNN. Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate what the gentleman from 
Louisiana just stated. I think it is very important, since we are at 
the point of considering such a resolution on the floor of the House, 
for us to look at this situation as one in which there are two ships 
passing in the night.
  My Democratic colleagues seem to be referring to activities that 
happened in the library, with which we are all familiar. We are talking 
about the reason that the Sergeant at Arms was called to the committee 
in the first place. It is a situation that is not unknown to

[[Page 18703]]

my colleagues on the Committee on Ways and Means. The gentleman in 
question has created this sort of situation before, so it is not 
anything new. We all understand that. There have been letters written 
in the past, signed by members of the minority caucus, castigating the 
behavior of the gentleman in question. That is why the Sergeant at Arms 
was called to our committee. I just have to say that if I had been 
sitting in the Chair at that moment I would have felt constrained to 
call the Sergeant at Arms.
  And I am sorry that the members of our wonderful committee that does 
most of its work with great dignity, who were missing all but one of 
its minority members because they were having a caucus in the library, 
but we who were sitting in the hearing room and all the people who were 
in the audience saw exactly what was going on; not the first time, not 
the second time, but it happened many, many times. This was a time when 
I believe it was entirely appropriate for the chairman to use his 
authority to regain order in the hearing room by calling the Sergeant 
at Arms.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of the 
resolution. As many of you know, I am a man of peace. During the 1960s, 
many of us involved in the Civil Rights movement were threatened with 
arrest for sitting in at lunch counters, standing in at segregated 
theaters, or marching for the right to vote; and sometimes we were 
arrested and jailed. We were charged with disturbing the peace or 
disorderly conduct, and we were very peaceful and we were orderly.
  I never thought that as a Member of Congress I would be threatened 
with arrest by sitting in the library of the Committee on Ways and 
Means. As a Member of Congress and as a member of the Committee on Ways 
and Means, I thought, I really believed that it was a safe place to 
meet and to discuss the business of the committee.
  It is unreal, it is unthinkable that another Member of Congress would 
threaten to have another arrested for carrying out his or her 
congressional duties. In another period of time, a few short years ago, 
some of us stood up to Bull Conner in Birmingham, Alabama, and we stood 
up to Sheriff Clark in Selma, Alabama. And I must say to the chairman 
of this committee, we will not be intimidated. We will not be 
immobilized. We live in a democracy and not a police state.
  What happened today in the Committee on Ways and Means should cause a 
sense of righteous indignation among all of us. As Democrats, as 
Members of this House, the People's House, we will not get lost in a 
sea of despair. We will continue to stand up and fight for what is 
right and for what is fair.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, may I request the time remaining on each 
side?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery) 
has 9\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Pelosi) has 9\1/4\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kleczka), a member of the Committee on 
Ways and Means.
  Mr. KLECZKA. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis) 
took the floor to relate what happened. And although I was not in the 
room, I did speak to the Democrat that was in the room. The comments of 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) were preceded by the words, 
``shut up.'' And that was by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), 
inciting the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) to respond. Now, 
that sort of slipped his memory when he talked to us before.
  So, now, here is the scenario. Here is a man in excess of 70 years 
old threatening a man 30 years his junior, and the chairman was afraid 
that the 30-year-old junior was going to get beat up. Hello.
  Mr. Speaker, since your election, you have conducted this House with 
total honor. You have made all of us proud to be Members of Congress. 
But it is one thing to defend one of your own, but it is surely another 
to do so less than honorably, in fact, dishonorably and dishonestly.
  The fact of the matter is the police, who have a lot of things to do 
around here protecting the Americans, were called because of a 
disturbance against Democrats. I was in the room when the police came. 
Two officers came to clear us out because we were causing a 
disturbance.
  So do not go lying about what happened. It is an embarrassment 
enough, and this could be resolved by the chairman in question 
apologizing to all of us, and the issue would be done with.

                              {time}  1415

  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Missouri (Mr. Hulshof), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, hopefully to further clarify some of the 
questions that have been asked, and I see the gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Rangel) has been provided a transcript from this morning's 
Committee on Ways and Means markup, what I would like to do is read the 
relevant portions, I think, which then necessitated the calling of the 
Sergeant at Arms.
  This would be at page 15, line 331, the chairman stated, ``If the 
gentleman will suspend. If the gentleman from California would 
understand he is reading the table of contents, which is at the 
beginning of the bill.''
  The remaining minority Member said, ``Oh, that.''
  Line 335, ``Chairman Thomas. He will then move to the body of the 
bill. That is how these things work.'' To which the sole Member of the 
minority party that was left in the room said this at line 337, ``Its 
eloquence overwhelms me, Mr. Chairman, just like your intellect does. 
It is--oh, you think you are big enough to make me, you little wimp? 
Come on. Come over here and make me. I dare you.''
  The transcript indicates in brackets ``laughter,'' to which the 
minority member then said, ``You little fruitcake. You little 
fruitcake. I said you are a fruitcake.''
  Now, what the transcript does not indicate, and I would have to stay 
with the transcript, and just as many of us who have had previous 
experience in criminal courtrooms or civil courtrooms, the transcript 
is, of course, the cold recitation of words that are spoken.
  If Members will permit me to characterize just a bit, I was sitting 
next to the gentleman from Colorado, and I would tell the Speaker that 
the words specifically regarding, ``Are you big enough to make me, you 
little wimp? Come on. Come over here and make me. I dare you,'' I 
happened to turn around in my chair because I am on the lower dais and 
looked up, and it was the sole Democratic member who was remaining who 
was directing those words directly at the gentleman from Colorado.
  If Members would permit me to characterize a little bit more, even 
though laughter erupted, as someone who was witnessing this event, Mr. 
Speaker, the words were uttered in a very serious tone, dare I say in a 
threatening tone. I do not think I am mischaracterizing the import of 
these words.
  This, of course, was done during the reading of the bill. Ultimately, 
the chairman was able to get a unanimous consent request. That is later 
reflected. Then we were able to move and consider the bill, but this 
was done before the Capitol Police were called; and were I the chairman 
in the same situation, I, too, would have contacted the Sergeant at 
Arms to return decorum to our committee room.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Mrs. Jones), the newest member of the Committee on Ways and 
Means.
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I was not in the room when the 
interaction occurred between the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) 
and other Members of Congress, but I was in the library when the police 
came in and said that Democrats were causing a disturbance, and the 
police were required to come.

[[Page 18704]]

  This is the second time I have been on the floor of the House and 
been required to do something that is distasteful for me as a Member of 
Congress. The first was with the Committee on Standards of Conduct, and 
the second is with the chairman of my committee.
  Members know I have been a judge. When a judge hosts a courtroom, he 
or she sets the standard. The chairman must set the standard in a 
committee room. We are talking about an interaction that went on this 
day, but I came from the Committee on Financial Services where I had a 
chairman who allowed members of the committee to speak and did not 
cause members to react to his response.
  If Members check the transcript of our hearings, every time someone 
says something, the chairman has a response for whatever witness it is.
  Mr. Speaker, I have respect for the chairman. I find it hard to stand 
here today, but the reality is that he called the police on his 
colleagues, and no one can take a thing away from that.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Shaw).
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentlewoman, a respected 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means who was a judge, I would say 
that I also was a judge, and if anyone had conducted themselves like 
that in my courtroom, they would have been held in contempt of court.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Doggett), a former judge of the Supreme Court of Texas and a 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, there is no small amount of irony that the 
bill in question before the committee today was H.R. 1776. The 
democracy that our forebears brought to being in this land requires our 
continual vigilance. We are reminded of the words of James Madison that 
there are more instances of abridgement by gradual encroachments of 
those in power than by violent and sudden usurpation.
  Mr. Speaker, a committee chairman today ordered the police to evict 
Members of this Congress from a committee room on the edge of the 
markup. When Officer Spriggs arrived in that room, the committee 
library, he was not looking for the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Stark). He was there, as he said, to clear the room on the instructions 
of the chief of staff of the committee chairman of the Committee on 
Ways and Means.
  My friends, this is how tyranny begins. It is our responsibility to 
stand against a police state, to stand in favor of open dialogue rather 
than to permit a bill to pass with only the votes of one party and move 
toward a one-party state.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), a member of the Committee on Ways and 
Means.
  Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, this is simple, serious, 
and sad. Significant errors of utterance and judgment were made by 
members of the Committee on Ways and Means of both parties this 
morning. The chairman responded to what were fast-paced comments and 
actions. There were good reasons for the chairman's judgments and 
actions and good reasons why he altered those judgments and actions as 
circumstances changed. For that he is to be commended. To elevate an 
incident of which no Member on either side of the aisle is proud is 
destructive to this body.
  I regret the minority party's decision to enshrine in a resolution 
some facts while omitting others crucial to the flow of events. That 
does this House no good, and I urge opposition to this resolution.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Tennessee (Mr. Tanner), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. TANNER. I yield to the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I have a question on behalf of all of 
those Members who were not in any of those rooms: If it was the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) in the hearing room with the 
fruitcake, why did you sic the cops on the Democrats in the library?
  Mr. TANNER. Mr. Speaker, I was not going to speak, but I must say to 
the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery), you know if you are using 
whatever confrontation took place between the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Stark) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery), that is 
absolutely not true. The policeman came to the library, one, before 
that happened; and, second, if the problem was in the hearing room 
between the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) and the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), why would the policemen come to the 
library to begin with? They came in there, and the gentleman may not 
know it, but we asked, Why are you here?
  They said, we have been given orders to remove you from the library. 
It had nothing, nothing whatsoever to do with what went on in the 
hearing room. That is the truth.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker says that is the 
truth, but the fact is he was not there. He has no independent 
knowledge of who called the Sergeant at Arms or the reason for it. I 
resent the gentleman's tone. It is erroneous. His statement is 
erroneous.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Brady), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I was present during this 
confrontation, not just present but the physically closest member to 
the incident. I saw it firsthand. I was not in the library or out of 
the room; I was there.
  First, I think the official transcript puts a lie to this resolution. 
Furthermore, being the person sitting in front of the lone minority 
member, who in my opinion, in fact, my knowledge, instigated this 
confrontation, what I witnessed was a profanity-laced, angry, 
degrading, physical confrontation that was growing in volume, not 
lessening. It was a tirade completely inappropriate to this Congress 
and to that committee.
  What I did, my action was to turn to the audience, looking for young 
people, hoping that there was no young person in that committee room 
who would witness the behavior of the gentleman who instigated this 
incident. Had it been me, I, too, would have made a phone call * * *
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I demand that the gentleman's words be 
taken down.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the words.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it has come to my attention, rightly 
so, that at the conclusion of my remarks, I need to clarify the words 
that I spoke in this House in order to also set an example for decorum 
and civility. At the end of my remarks, I made reference to an 
emotional state and bodily functions when, in fact, what I really was 
referencing was potential bodily conduct.
  To clarify and also because I really do hold our colleagues in 
deference, I would ask unanimous consent to withdraw that portion of my 
remarks.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). Is there 
objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?
  Mr. ACKERMAN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I do 
not intend to object, I thank the gentleman very much for trying to 
bring civility back to the House which is very important. In 
consultation with the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark), who was 
the only Democrat on the committee who the police were not called to 
throw out of the library because he was not in the library, he was in 
the committee room, the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) has 
accepted your apology.
  Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the words are withdrawn.
  There was no objection.

[[Page 18705]]


  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the very distinguished Chair 
of the Democratic Caucus.
  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. Speaker, we can hear all the spin and diversion 
that the majority wants to lay there, but this is the point: this 
morning in the People's House, the heart of our great American 
democracy, the Republican chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means 
called the police, the police, in an attempt to break up a meeting of 
House Democrats.
  Why did he call the police? Because he did not like what Democrats 
were meeting about and that Democrats as the minority availed 
themselves of what little protection they have under the rules. This is 
what Republicans have come to in the running of this House. If they do 
not like what we say, even in a private meeting, they will try to have 
us arrested. If we object, and they do not like it, they will try to 
have us arrested. Does that sound like America to you? Or does that 
sound like some sort of police state? Our distinguished Speaker should 
be in the chair and alarmed that this happened under your watch. Power 
corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. An example of that is 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) calling the Department of Homeland 
Security to track down Texas legislators. Where does this end? This 
institution cannot and must not tolerate this sort of abusive and 
intimidating behavior. And this one will not be swept under the rug 
until justice is done.
  Some of us come from families that fled this kind of persecution. I 
never thought that I would see that persecution take place right here 
in the people's House, the very place where people are sent to the 
greatest democracy in the world.
  Some claim that the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) had the 
police called in response to a disturbance, but why was the majority 
chief of staff escorting the police back to the library where the 
Democrats were meeting? The answer is obvious. The chairman was annoyed 
and wanted to break up that meeting of Democrats, and he was willing to 
use the police to do it. As the chairman of the Democratic Caucus, I 
want you to know that our Members will not be silenced on behalf of the 
136 million Americans we represent in this House.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Hyperbole is something that is used often for effect, even in 
fictional writing. On the floor of the House debating something this 
serious, I think it has no place. And to claim that the police were 
there to arrest Democrats is indeed hyperbole. No one ever suggested 
that anyone was to be arrested. There is no evidence to that. Not even 
any hearsay to that. The fact is they were being asked to move from 
that room to another Ways and Means hearing room.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr. Weller).
  Mr. WELLER. Mr. Speaker, I look around this room today and I see 
friends on both sides of the aisle. On my committee I have friends that 
are Democrats and friends that are Republicans, and I think no one 
wishes we were going through this exercise today. But as one of those 
who was in the room, and I think those who were in the room are the 
best witnesses to be speaking today, not those who were not at the room 
and heard what might have occurred, but those who actually witnessed 
it.
  I often think, what would I have done if I was the chairman? I think 
all of us, Republicans and Democrats, a lot of us would like to be a 
chairman someday, what would we do if we were in the same situation? 
And going back to that room this morning, going to the official 
transcript of this morning's markup of H.R. 1776, again let me refer to 
the record, the official record, line 337, beginning with the sole 
remaining minority party Member in the committee room at that time:
  ``Its eloquence overwhelms me, Mr. Chairman, just like your intellect 
does.''
  Clearly the question would be, what would you do if you were the 
chairman and you had a member there that was using invective, innuendo, 
name-calling, physically threatening another colleague? Would you have 
worked to restore order? I am one of those who stands and believes that 
if I was the chairman today, I would have summoned the Sergeant at Arms 
to ask for order as well.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), a member of the committee.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I, too, was sitting closest to 
the lone minority member in the Chamber. I was there in the Chamber 
next to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady). I heard the comments. It 
was very, very clear that a physical threat was made, that a situation 
was getting out of control, that we had a physical situation on our 
hands; and if I were in the position that the chairman was, I believe 
that the Capitol Police or the Sergeant at Arms should have been called 
to restore order.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from 
Kentucky (Mr. Lewis), a member of the committee.
  Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I also was seated in front of the 
minority member. I can validate everything that has been said here on 
the majority side. It was a situation that seemed to be getting out of 
control. It was getting out of control. Again, if I would have been the 
chairman, I would have done exactly what Chairman Thomas did.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. English), a member of the committee.
  Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Speaker, unlike any of the speakers on the other 
side, I was also in the room. I saw what was said. I saw what was 
implied. And I saw the behavior of the chairman close up. May I say 
what is embarrassing the House today is not the behavior of the 
chairman. I think he did what in his judgment was right to proceed with 
what became a very contentious hearing. What I am very unhappy about is 
the fact that this resolution has even been brought to the floor. It is 
an embarrassment to this institution.

                              {time}  1445

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished whip for the Democrats.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, we are a Nation of laws. This House was 
established to make those laws. We have a manual. It is called 
Jefferson's Manual. It has in it the Constitution of the United States 
of America. It has as well the rules that Jefferson put forward.
  At page 123 it says, ``the weaker party can only be protected from 
those irregularities and abuses which these forms were intended to 
check, and which the wantonness of power is but too often apt to 
suggest to large and successful majorities.''
  Mr. Speaker, I have great respect for you, and you run this House 
fairly. But this is another instance, not an isolated incidence, not a 
unique incidence of the arbitrary use of power. The Committee on Rules 
shuts us down. It does not give us amendments. It does not give us time 
to debate. It does not adequately give us substitutes. It shuts down 
the majority. It shuts down the minority. This is not what Jefferson 
had in mind nor, I suggest to you, our Founding Fathers.
  This is indeed not an isolated incident. The police were called. 
There is a dispute of facts as to why the police were called. But there 
seems to be no dispute that they did not go to the committee room. They 
went to the library, presumably because that is where they were told to 
go. They know the difference, believe me, to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. McCrery), they know the difference.
  This is not an isolated or unique incidence. The police were called 
by the Speaker of the Texas House to go arrest 55 members of the Texas 
House because they would not go along with the majority.

[[Page 18706]]

  Let me read from page 18 of the transcript of the proceedings.
  ``Mr. Yin, as you go through, would you periodically indicate which 
page you are on.'' They are reading the bill. ``We are going to be 
going through the titles, and if it lengthens out, it gets more 
complicated.'' Mr. Thomas is speaking. ``I know you have just begun on 
page 3 in doing that.'' Under the rules, the reading of the bill, what 
is the next thing that is said? ``And, without objection, it is 
considered as read.
  ``Mr. Stark: I object.
  ``Mr. Thomas: The gentleman was too late.''
  Absent was a request for objection. That, my friends, is the gravamen 
of this case. You are trampling on the rights of the minority. You are 
trampling on the rules of this institution. This is America. This is 
not American.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, assuming that the gentlewoman from 
California has only one remaining speaker and that is to close, I yield 
20 seconds to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Hulshof), a member of 
the committee.
  Mr. HULSHOF. Mr. Speaker, what I would say to the previous speaker is 
the transcript is in fact true. What was not included was that in the 
transcript at the conclusion, again on page 18, line 24, ``And, without 
objection, it is considered as read.'' At that point, the chairman 
struck the gavel.
  Mr. HOYER. * * *
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Herger), a member of the committee.
  Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, it is an incredible privilege and honor to 
serve in this body.
  This is not a happy or a proud day for any one of us. We were all 
here late last night until midnight. Those of us who serve on the 
Committee on Ways and Means, as I do, were here early this morning. I 
was sitting throughout the entire meeting. I was sitting up on the 
dias. I personally looked down and was able to see what took place, and 
I support our chairman in his calling for support at that time.

                              {time}  1530

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington). The gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery) has 1 minute and 10 seconds remaining.
  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.
  It is time for the House to bring to a close this resolution. I would 
say that in no way has the minority, which brought this resolution to 
the floor, proved any facts which would substantiate a rationale for 
passage of this resolution, and I would urge all Members on both sides 
of the aisle to reject this resolution and vote ``no.''
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.
  First, I want to congratulate the Chair on the dignified manner in 
which he has conducted the proceedings today.
  It is clear from the debate today that the Republicans have a major 
problem with the democratic process. It is clear that the Republicans 
are in denial about their behavior, and it is clear that the Democrats 
must draw a line in the sand on the repression of our rights in this 
Congress.
  My resolution does just that. It says to the Republican majority that 
our constituents have a right to be heard. Every day that right is 
abused; but today, the Republicans went over the edge.
  The facts are these: the police came to the library behind the 
committee, while the bill was still being read. There is no confusion 
as to why the police went to the library, and the police did not go to 
the library once or twice. They went to the library three times to 
evict the Democratic Members. First came the policeman and then came 
their superior and then came a representative of the Sergeant at Arms 
office to clear the room, to evict the Members from that room.
  That is why, and if there is any challenge to these facts, we can 
take up this discussion under oath under the auspices of the Committee 
of Standards of Official Conduct.
  We must insist on this House supporting the resolve that it is wrong 
for the Chair to conduct his committee meetings and have part of that 
be by calling the police, and we must insist that the markup that took 
place is not validly ordered reported to the House.
  There is no confusion. The question before the House is this: Is it 
right for the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means to call the 
police to evict Democratic Members from their meeting place? Again, the 
police came not once, not twice, but three times.
  A vote for my resolution is a vote to reject that kind of behavior. 
It is wrong for the committee Chair to call the police, and my 
Republican colleagues just do not know that; and the country should 
know that about them. Why is it not clear to you that it is not right 
to call the police to evict your colleagues from a room?
  What should be a stunning fact to the American people is that the 
Republicans in the House of Representatives need to be convinced that 
it is wrong to call the police to evict their Democratic colleagues 
from their meeting. I say that over and over again.
  We talk about the power of ideas. We heard the brilliant speech 
yesterday of the Prime Minister of Great Britain, talking about liberty 
and the pride we should take in our contribution to it throughout the 
world and about the power of ideas; but the power of our example speaks 
louder than all of that. And what is the example that we show to the 
rest of the world when we have a chairman of the committee calling the 
police to evict his colleagues from a room?
  The Greeks had a word for it, ``hubris.'' It was about power, abuse 
of power, arrogance; and it is a tragic flaw. We cannot allow your 
tragic flaw to shut down the voices of the American people. We will 
fight you every step of the way, every day in this House of 
Representatives.
  I want to thank my Democratic colleagues for staying, for their 
thoughtful presentations during this difficult debate, and for their 
love of this institution; and I urge my colleagues to support this very 
important resolution, important to the integrity of this House of 
Representatives.
  Ms. KILPATRICK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to protest the outrageous 
display of discourtesy and disrespect shown to Democratic members of 
the House and Minority Leader Pelosi. In a brazen display of disregard 
for Democratic members of the House, the Capitol Police were dispatched 
on three occasions to disrupt the reading of legislative text by 
Democratic members who serve on the Ways and Means Committee. The 
Members were attempting to ascertain the text of the legislation that 
was drafted without their consultation and for which their dissent 
would not be heard or heeded.
  The actions of the Republican Chairman and the Members of the 
committee was indeed egregious and beyond the pale of House decorum. 
Indeed, the actions and attitudes witnessed, and the rhetoric and 
rationale put forward by the majority dishonors the foundation of 
civility and respect of the House of Representatives. It is clear that 
a political fissure exists between the majority and the minority. I 
call upon my majority colleagues to embrace the age-old methodology and 
attitude of, ``. . . do unto others as you would have them do unto 
you.''
  Today was a sad day in the annals of House deliberations. I hope that 
the American public does not have to ever witness this type of behavior 
again. I also hope that my esteemed colleagues will re-embrace the 
spirit and method of appropriate House decorum.


                 Motion to Table Offered by Mr. McCrery

  Mr. McCRERY. Mr. Speaker, I have a privileged motion at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. McCrery moves to lay the resolution on the table.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to table 
offered by the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. McCrery).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 170, 
noes 143, not voting 122, as follows:

[[Page 18707]]



                             [Roll No. 397]

                               AYES--170

     Akin
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Bereuter
     Biggert
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burns
     Calvert
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Doolittle
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English
     Feeney
     Flake
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gibbons
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Goss
     Graves
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastert
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Miller (FL)
     Miller, Gary
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Ose
     Pearce
     Petri
     Pickering
     Platts
     Pombo
     Porter
     Portman
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Schrock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (NJ)
     Souder
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tauzin
     Terry
     Thomas
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NOES--143

     Ackerman
     Alexander
     Andrews
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Becerra
     Bell
     Berry
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Boyd
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Cramer
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dicks
     Doggett
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Evans
     Farr
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Grijalva
     Hall
     Hastings (FL)
     Hill
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     John
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McIntyre
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Peterson (MN)
     Pomeroy
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Spratt
     Stark
     Strickland
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Weiner
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu

                            NOT VOTING--122

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Baca
     Barton (TX)
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (NY)
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Boucher
     Burgess
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Camp
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carter
     Case
     Costello
     Cox
     Cubin
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLay
     Dingell
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Edwards
     Emanuel
     Etheridge
     Everett
     Fattah
     Ferguson
     Fletcher
     Gallegly
     Gephardt
     Gonzalez
     Gordon
     Granger
     Green (TX)
     Gutierrez
     Harman
     Hensarling
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Issa
     Istook
     Janklow
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Kaptur
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Lampson
     Linder
     Lipinski
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Mica
     Millender-McDonald
     Miller (MI)
     Moran (KS)
     Nethercutt
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Otter
     Owens
     Oxley
     Pascrell
     Paul
     Pence
     Peterson (PA)
     Pitts
     Price (NC)
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Rothman
     Sabo
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Shuster
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Stenholm
     Stupak
     Tancredo
     Taylor (NC)
     Thornberry
     Toomey
     Udall (CO)
     Velazquez
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waxman
     Wynn


                Announcement By The Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hastings of Washington) (during the 
vote). There are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1600

  Ms. McCARTHY of Missouri and Mr. PAYNE changed their vote from 
``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the motion to table 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. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to 
vote on rollcall No. 397. Had I been present, I would have voted 
``aye''.
  Stated against:
  Ms. SOLIS. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall vote No. 397 on the motion to 
table H. Res. 324, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I 
would have voted ``no.''
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I regret that I had an event in my 
congressional district. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' 
on rollcall No. 397.
  Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained on Friday, July 
18, 2003, and missed rollcall No. 397. Had I been present, I would have 
voted ``no.''

                          ____________________