[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 1401-1402]
[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.)

[[Page 1402]]


  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I take this time for the purpose of inquiring 
of the majority leader the schedule for the week to come.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would be pleased to yield to my friend, the 
gentleman from Texas, the majority leader, for the purposes of 
informing us of the schedule.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished whip, the gentleman 
from Maryland, for yielding to me.
  Mr. Speaker, the House will convene on Tuesday at 2 p.m. for 
legislative business. We will consider several measures under 
suspension of the rules. A final list of those bills will be sent to 
Members' offices by the end of the week. Any votes called on those 
measures will be rolled until 6:30 p.m.
  On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will convene at 10 a.m. We 
likely will consider additional legislation under suspension of the 
rules, as well as H.R. 418, the Real ID Act of 2005.
  Finally, I would like to remind Members that we do not plan, do not 
plan, to have votes next Friday, February 11.
  And I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I would be happy to 
answer any questions he may have.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for 
the schedule.
  With reference to the Real ID bill, Mr. Leader, can you tell us at 
this point in time the type of rule that that will be considered under; 
and, in particular, what amendments, not necessarily specific 
amendments, but whether amendments will be allowed, motions to 
recommit, and items of that nature.
  Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I 
would assume that the Committee on Rules would follow a process similar 
to the one that they followed for the rest of the 9/11 Commission's 
recommendations, and that is to have a structured rule that allows for 
a variety of amendments. But I will let the chairman of the Committee 
on Rules make announcements on that and reserve decisions for the 
committee on what those amendments will be.
  I can tell the gentleman that we are contemplating, although actions 
by the Committee on Rules will need to be taken, contemplating a rule 
that would merge the border security bill into another bill, another 
must-pass piece of legislation, not knowing what that would be. But, 
obviously, the supplement could be a candidate for that.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time once again, I presume the 
gentleman is talking about merged at some later date. Obviously, the 
must-pass bill would not be available next week. Am I correct?
  Mr. DeLAY. That is correct.
  Mr. HOYER. So the gentleman is talking about merging it at some time 
in the future after passage?
  Mr. DeLAY. That is correct.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, with respect to the energy bill, it is my 
understanding that there is some discussion that the energy bill may 
proceed not next week but the week following. Can you tell me whether 
that is a reasonable possibility, or probability?
  Mr. DeLAY. We are contemplating several major pieces of legislation 
that we would hope to complete before the Easter break, and we are also 
contemplating several bills that we contemplate completing prior to the 
Presidents' Day district work period.
  The comprehensive energy bill, which we passed in the last Congress 
and in the 107th Congress, is a very high priority for this year. There 
is a good chance that we could consider a national energy policy bill 
before the Presidents' Day district work period.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, I might say that I think all of us understand 
the importance of energy legislation. All of us understand the 
necessity to become energy independent. I would suggest, in that 
framework, that I think personally that we can pass an energy bill. 
Obviously, there are some items that are in the energy bill or that are 
proposed for the energy bill that have significant opposition on one 
side of the aisle or the other.
  I would hope, Mr. Leader, if we could, in working with the various 
committee Chairs, and I suppose most primarily the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Barton) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) in this 
respect, to come to as bipartisan an agreement on the substance of that 
bill so that we could see it not just pass through the House of 
Representatives, which may be interesting in terms of the political 
claim that we passed it, but which does nothing for our energy 
independence, which is, I think, our objective.
  So I would hope that we could deal with this in as bipartisan a 
fashion as possible so that when we send it to the other body that we 
may have more success there, more success out of conference, and send a 
bill to the President that will facilitate both energy independence and 
the effective and efficient discovery, development, and delivery at 
retail to the consumer of energy options. I do not know whether you 
want to say anything.
  Mr. DeLAY. Well, Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to 
yield, I would just say that the gentleman is right. We will try our 
best to reach out and make this bill as bipartisan as possible.
  I would just remind the gentleman that this bill, this energy 
package, has passed, I cannot recall every time, but many times in the 
last Congress; and it even passed this House as a conference report. 
Each time that the energy bill has gone through this House, whether it 
be the House bill or in the conference report, it has enjoyed a very 
large Democrat vote.
  So, yes, I would hope that the chairmen of the respective committees 
that have a piece of this bill, and I would also remind the gentleman 
that the Committee on Ways and Means has a very big piece of this bill, 
would reach out to their ranking members and work to put together as 
bipartisan a bill as possible.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for referencing the 
Committee on Ways and Means, but I certainly agree with him that having 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) and the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Rangel) work closely together, and perhaps their respective 
Chairs of the subcommittees that might deal with that work together, 
would be very, very useful to accomplishing an objective as opposed to 
simply passing a bill that then languishes in the Congress and never 
gets to the President.
  If, in fact, we consider that, and it sounds to me like we certainly 
do not have enough information to determine whether or not the week 
after next the energy bill might be on the floor, but if and when it 
comes to the floor, Mr. Leader, would you contemplate the possibility 
of having an open rule on that piece of legislation, given its 
importance and scope?
  I am happy to yield to the gentleman for a response, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. DeLAY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me, Mr. Speaker.
  We have not discussed any rule. Actually, we are discussing with the 
relevant committee chairmen whether we can get it that quickly or not. 
But I would imagine that the Committee on Rules would have the same 
sort of rule that we have had on this bill for the last couple of 
years. So I would not see anything changing.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would hope on that bill, because of its 
great importance to the security of the Nation and to all of our 
consumers of energy, which is to say all of us, that we would have as 
broad a consideration of it as possible so that we could get 
everybody's ideas put on the floor, voted up or down, and move the bill 
with as big a consensus as we can accomplish.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader.

                          ____________________