[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 11]
[House]
[Pages 14838-14840]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2030
  LIMITATION ON AMENDMENTS DURING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 3058, 
TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THE JUDICIARY, 
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 
                                  2006

  Mr. KNOLLENBERG. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during 
further consideration of H.R. 3058 in the Committee of the Whole 
pursuant to House Resolution 342, notwithstanding clause 11 of rule 
XVIII, no further amendment to the bill may be offered except:
  Pro forma amendments offered at any point in the reading by the 
chairman or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations 
or their designees for the purpose of debate;

[[Page 14839]]

  Amendments printed in the Record and numbered 4, 8 and 13;
  An amendment by Mr. Nadler regarding HOPWA;
  An amendment by Mr. Pickering regarding enforcement of the 
Individuals With Disabilities Parking Reform Amendment Act;
  An amendment by Mr. Obey regarding D.C. funding;
  An amendment by Mr. Sanders regarding contracting out flight service 
stations, which shall be debatable for 20 minutes;
  An amendment by Ms. DeLauro regarding corporate entities chartered in 
Antigua, Panama, Bermuda, Barbados and the Cayman Islands, which shall 
be debatable for 15 minutes;
  An amendment by Mr. Obey regarding an OMB Circular, which shall be 
debatable for 40 minutes;
  An amendment by Mr. Cuellar regarding funding for the Community 
Development Fund;
  An amendment by Mrs. Jones of Ohio regarding HOME Investment 
Partnership Program;
  An amendment by Ms. Waters regarding funding for the Community 
Development Fund;
  An amendment by Mr. Costello regarding cities of Alton and Granite 
City, Illinois;
  An amendment by Mr. King of Iowa regarding funding for the Supreme 
Court;
  An amendment by Ms. Herseth regarding judiciary funding;
  An amendment by Ms. Hooley regarding increasing funds for HIDTA;
  An amendment by Ms. Velazquez regarding e-travel and small business 
protection;
  An amendment by Ms. Kilpatrick of Michigan regarding the sale of 
Unocal Corporation;
  An amendment by Mr. Van Hollen regarding revisions to circular A-76;
  An amendment by Mr. Tiahrt regarding regulations on U.S. business 
competitiveness;
  An amendment by Mr. Hefley regarding an across-the-board cut;
  An amendment by Mr. Brown of Ohio regarding reporting on the cost of 
new prescription drugs;
  An amendment by Mr. Hinchey regarding private contractor activity;
  An amendment by Mr. Garrett of New Jersey regarding eminent domain;
  An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding the travel ban with Cuba;
  An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding religious exemption on the travel 
ban with Cuba;
  An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding cap on remittances with Cuba;
  An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding enforcement of the weight limit 
on baggage for travel to Cuba;
  An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding amateur sports teams travel to 
Cuba;
  An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding family travel to Cuba by members 
of the Armed Forces;
  An amendment by Mr. Flake regarding trade agreements and their 
relationship with Cuba;
  An amendment by Ms. Lee regarding academic institutions and travel to 
Cuba;
  An amendment by Mr. Rangel regarding enforcement of the economic 
embargo on Cuba;
  An amendment by Mr. Honda regarding military recruiters and the 
Department of Education;
  An amendment by Mr. Markey regarding transfer of tax activity among 
countries;
  An amendment by Mr. Wynn regarding financial contractors;
  An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding section 12 of the 
U.S. Housing Act;
  An amendment by Mr. Clay regarding FHA loans and abusive lending 
practices;
  An amendment by Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas regarding funding for the 
FAA;
  An amendment by Mr. Souder regarding enforcement of firearms laws in 
D.C.;
  An amendment by Mr. Simmons regarding private debt collection;
  An amendment by Mr. Souder regarding media campaigns; and
  An amendment by Mr. Knollenberg regarding funding levels.
  Each such amendment may be offered only by the Member named in this 
request or a designee, or by the Member who caused it to be printed in 
the Record or a designee, shall be considered as read, shall not be 
subject to amendment except that the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Appropriations and the Subcommittee on 
Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development each may 
offer one pro forma amendment for the purpose of debate; and shall not 
be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in 
the Committee of the Whole.
  Except as otherwise specified, each amendment shall be debatable for 
10 minutes, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent. An amendment shall be considered to fit the description 
stated in this request if it addresses in whole or in part the object 
described.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Michigan?
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, as I understand 
this unanimous consent proposal, what this means is that we still face 
the need to dispose of some 43 amendments. As I calculate it, given the 
time allotted to each, that means that with the slippage that normally 
occurs, we are looking at approximately 9 hours of additional debate on 
these issues, without counting the time that it takes to conduct the 
roll calls on whatever issues are put to a roll call.
  I would urge Members to recognize that if all of these amendments are 
offered, we are going to be here until the cows come home, as they say 
in my area, and I think we would prefer to see debate more focused than 
that.
  For instance, under this agreement, we face the prospect of having 
some 10 amendments on Cuba. I would hope that we could focus that issue 
on the most important issues that are involved.
  Having said that, I would simply like to ask one question under my 
reservation: It is my understanding that if this unanimous consent 
agreement is agreed to, that we would proceed to debate further issues 
until 9:45 tonight. At 9:45, we will take whatever votes are pending. 
We would then resume action in the House tomorrow at 10 o'clock, and 
that this committee would be allowed to complete its business before 
any other matter comes before the House.
  Is that a correct understanding?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. OBEY. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. On behalf of the leadership, let me try to 
respond. The gentleman's description of the schedule this evening is 
exactly on target, and it is our intention, the leadership's intention, 
to come to the Floor at 10 o'clock in the morning. This bill will be up 
and the committee's work will be done before we proceed to anything 
else. The gentleman is correct.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman. I 
would simply like to point out, it is not particularly important to me 
whether we finish the appropriation bills before we leave for the July 
4 recess or not, but I was under the impression that it was important 
to the gentleman from California and to the majority leadership. I am 
willing to cooperate in that effort, but I do not want any other 
committee business to come before the House that would get in the way 
of accomplishing that end.
  So if that is the understanding and if the gentleman is in fact 
speaking for the leadership on that matter?
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield 
further. The gentleman and I discussed this earlier. On behalf of the 
leadership, they have given me direction to publicly outline that 
agreement. We will be coming in at 10 o'clock in the morning. Our bill 
will be completed before we proceed to any other matters.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, with that understanding, I would be happy to 
withdraw my reservation of objection and wish Mr. Knollenberg good 
luck.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there further objection to the request of 
the gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.

[[Page 14840]]



                          ____________________