[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 2066-2068]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                          LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM

  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that both of us are 
brand new in this job and this is the first time we are doing this, I 
want the gentleman from Texas (Mr. DeLay) to know that I am pleased to 
yield to him today and will be pleased to yield to him in days to come. 
I want him to stay leader; I would just like to change the designation, 
the adjective, but I yield to the majority leader.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me, 
and I appreciate his interest in changing my title, but that will not 
happen for another 2 years, at least.
  Before I discuss next week's schedule, I would like to note for the 
gentleman and other Members of the House a very significant historical 
event that took place in the House of Representatives during this week 
back in 1815. Mr. Speaker, the Library of Congress was established back 
in 1800, and the Library was housed here in the Capitol, as many of us 
know, until 1814 when the British troops set fire to the building and 
destroyed most of the books in our collection. Retired President Thomas 
Jefferson graciously offered his personal library from Monticello as a 
replacement, and Congress purchased the library 188 years ago today for 
the sum of $23,950.
  Now, after the job he did in the Louisiana Purchase, one would have 
thought Mr. Jefferson would have negotiated a little higher price from 
us, but, in any case, it was a great deal for America and a gracious 
gesture for our great champion of ideas.
  Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would continue to yield, the House will 
convene on Tuesday in pro forma session. On Wednesday we hope to 
consider the conference report on H. Res. 2, which will finish up the 
2003 appropriations process. However, if the conference report is not 
ready for floor consideration, the House will need to consider another 
continuing resolution on Wednesday.
  In addition, we may consider some measure under suspension of the 
rules. A list will be provided to all offices by Monday evening. There 
will be no votes in the House before 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, and on 
Thursday we expect to consider H.R. 395, the Do Not Call Implementation 
Act, to restrain rampant telemarketers, and finish with legislative 
business for the week by 1 p.m.

                              {time}  1330

  Mr. Speaker, I am happy to answer any questions.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the information he 
has given to us. I understand we are coming back at 6:30 p.m. on 
Wednesday and leaving no later than 1 p.m. on Thursday. I know the 
gentleman's party has its retreat. Ours is this week, as the gentleman 
knows.
  I would ask the leader, Mr. Speaker, he indicates that the conference 
committee report may come back on Wednesday. If that is the case, does 
the gentleman have any information as to when the conference might 
meet?
  Mr. DeLAY. If the gentleman will continue to yield, Mr. Speaker, 
parties, both in the minority and the majority in both Houses, are 
speaking and talking to each other as we meet. Obviously, the chairman 
of the Committee on Appropriations in the House and the chairman in the 
Senate will do their own scheduling when the formal conference would be 
held.
  We are hoping that, working with the minority and the ranking Members 
of both Houses, and working hard through the weekend, as hard as they 
can, that they will come to some sort of resolution next week. That is 
the schedule that the House would like to see happen; but we know, as 
all these things happen, it could leak and we would have to do another 
continuing resolution for another week. Hopefully, by then all the work 
would be done.

[[Page 2067]]


  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for that information.
  Assuming that the conference report would be offered on Wednesday, 
assuming that work gets done, can the leader give us any information on 
the kind of rule under which that conference report would be 
considered? And I say that, Mr. Speaker, to the leader in the context 
that most members of the Committee on Appropriations, not to mention 
most Members of the House, have not had the opportunity to see exactly 
what is in the bill. I think we just got the papers yesterday, so there 
has not been much consideration.
  As the chairman, I am sure, knows, there will be a desire on, I am 
sure, both sides of the aisle, perhaps, to offer some legislative 
proposals to the conference committee report if they are made in order. 
Can the gentleman enlighten us as to what kind of rule the conference 
committee report might be considered under?
  Mr. DeLAY. If the gentleman will continue to yield, Mr. Speaker, the 
gentleman, as well as this gentleman, having served on the Committee on 
Appropriations, understands that this is a very unusual process that we 
are going through. In fact, I do not think we have gone through this 
process anytime that I have served on the Committee on Appropriations, 
so we are sort of feeling our way trying to get the appropriations 
done.
  I remind the gentleman that the Committee on Appropriations in the 
House passed out every one of the 13 bills out of committee, so we do 
have something to look at as to what at least the committee had done in 
the House; and they are trying to reconcile that with what the Senate 
did or what the other body did.
  As far as bringing it back, it is the tradition of this House and has 
been the tradition of this House to bring back a conference report on 
an appropriations bill under a closed rule. To be honest, I do not know 
that we would want to change that.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman. 
Let me make a couple of comments.
  First of all, the gentleman is almost right; we did 11 of the 13 
bills. But the second largest bill, of course, as the gentleman knows, 
on discretionary spending, not only did we not do it, but it was not 
considered in subcommittee, much less in full committee, the Labor-
Health bill, which is, of course, itself over $125 billion in 
discretionary spending, and somewhere approximately $300 billion, when 
we include the mandatory spending within that bill, as the gentleman 
recalls.
  But as the gentleman makes the point, this is the most unusual 
procedure for the appropriations process that I have seen in my 20 
years on the committee. It is the least involvement, I think, that 
members of the Committee on Appropriations in the House have had on the 
product that now is being sent to us by the Senate.
  I know that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) on the Labor-Health 
bill introduced 2 days ago a Labor-Health alternative, which presumably 
will be used as a basis for that title of the bill to be conferenced. 
However, Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman, I would very much 
hope that in light of the extraordinarily unusual circumstances under 
which this appropriation bill is being considered, essentially 
emanating from the Senate, which obviously from the House position is 
not what we want to see as normal practice, that the majority would 
very seriously consider, in the interests of democracy in this House, 
with a small ``d,'' and in the interest of full debate on the 
priorities we are going to set forth in this bill that deals with over 
$360 billion of discretionary spending, to have a rule that is not 
traditional, because we are not dealing with a traditional process.
  I would hope that the leader, in discussions with the Speaker, with 
the majority whip, and with the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young), as 
well as the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier), would consider a 
process which would allow Members to have a greater opportunity to 
express their views on this particular bill.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman for yielding 
again. The gentleman is correct in correcting me, that we only did 11 
bills out of the committee. I do remind the gentleman that the chairman 
introduced a Labor-HHS bill, and it is my information that that is what 
they are working from.
  Secondly, I would say that the conference committee as named has 12 
Republicans and 10 Democrats on it, so the minority is very well 
represented on the conference committee, and will be, obviously, 
consulted and worked with in as open a manner as possible.
  I would also point out the fact that conference reports are 
privileged resolutions, and it would be highly unusual for us to change 
the precedent and the rules governing privileged resolutions. So we are 
trying the best we can to accommodate any Member that is interested in 
what is going on in that conference, whether they be Democrat or 
Republican, by opening up the process as much as possible and having a 
process that Members can plug into so that their voices can be heard in 
the consideration of the conference.
  Mr. HOYER. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I understand what the 
gentleman has said; but I am sure the gentleman also understands our 
consternation, because we are going on a retreat for 2 days. We are 
leaving here tomorrow morning. I ask the gentleman when the conference 
is going to occur. We really do not know when the conference is going 
to occur.
  As the gentleman knows, like himself, I am a ranking member on the 
Committee on Appropriations. I have received no notice of a scheduled 
conference on this particular piece of legislation. I am one of the 
higher-ranking Members in the House. Therefore, I would think the 
gentleman and I would have access; but the more junior members of the 
Committee on Appropriations and those who do not serve on the Committee 
on Appropriations, while theoretically having some access to a 
conference, if the conference is never held, if there is no scheduled 
meeting, if they have no opportunity to participate in those 
deliberations, it is very difficult for them, short of acting on the 
floor, to consider this legislation.
  So I would simply ask of the leader, Mr. Speaker, again in light of 
the extraordinarily unusual process that has been pursued over the last 
12 months in dealing with the appropriation bills, and the fact that we 
did not bring the Labor-Health, one of the largest bills that our 
committee considers, to the floor or to full committee or to 
subcommittee for consideration, and yes, the chairman introduced a 
bill, but it was introduced by the chairman alone; it was not 
cosponsored by anybody else. That did not give us much input.
  I will not belabor this point further, but I would hope and ask my 
colleagues, in light of the fact that this is the first substantive 
piece of legislation that we are going to consider, that it be 
considered with an opportunity for those of us who represent somewhere 
in the neighborhood of 49 percent of the people of the United States to 
have their voice heard meaningfully in the deliberations.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield further, the 
gentleman makes a very good point. We want to be fair to all concerned. 
We want to have this as open a process as we possibly can make it.
  I just want the Members of this body to know that we just received 
the paper from the other body last night, so it is going to take 
probably the entire time of the gentleman's retreat for the staff to go 
through that paper and get it ready for Members' consideration. 
Obviously, the Members that are interested in having an impact on this 
conference will probably have an opportunity, or I know they will have 
an opportunity, starting Sunday or Monday, to have input into that 
process. I offer to the gentleman that if anybody feels that they have 
been shut out of the process, our office is open and we are more than 
willing to work with them.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments.

[[Page 2068]]



                          ____________________