[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 6]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 8777]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE ASSERTED BY REPRESENTATIVE NADLER, H. REP. 
109-51, CONCERNING H.R. 748, THE CHILD INTERSTATE ABORTION NOTIFICATION 
                              ACT OF 2005

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. SHEILA JACKSON-LEE

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 5, 2005

  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of 
the point raised by the gentleman from New York regarding the 
malreporting of the Republican Leadership of the Committee on the 
Judiciary with respect to H.R. 748, the Child Interstate Abortion 
Notification Act of 2005.
  Under Rule IX, paragraph (1) of the House Rules, Mr. Nadler 
justifiably asserts his point because not only his but my ``rights and 
reputation'' have been offended by the conduct of the Chairman in 
publishing House Report 109-51. To reiterate, the language used in 
pages 45-49 patently malreport and malign the authors of amendments to 
H.R. 748, the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act of 2005.
  Two days ago, on May 3, 2005, the Ranking Member of the Committee on 
the Judiciary led debate on his resolution of privilege, H. Res. 253 
that concerned the ways in which the act of the Chairman of the 
Judiciary Committee negatively affected the ``rights of the House 
collectively, its safety, dignity, and the integrity of its 
proceedings.''
  So too, was this resolution properly and justifiably introduced 
because, in that case, the privileges of ``dignity'' and ``the 
integrity of [the House's] proceedings'' have been patently violated. 
To purposefully misreport the good-faith amendments that have been 
offered by Members of this venerable House debases the nature and 
trustworthiness of the House Report.
  After this debacle, Members will have to scan committee reports with 
a fine-toothed comb--not for substantive value, but for accuracy and 
veracity of their reporting value! This is the diminution of the 
dignity of the process. This is the diminution of the integrity of the 
House.
  The American people must be made aware that we, the authors of the 
amendments on pages 45-49 of House Report 109-51 do not associate 
ourselves with the misreported portions thereof.
  House Report 109-51 not only improperly made negative inferences as 
to the import and intent of my amendments, but it combined two distinct 
and separately-offered amendments into one.
  In terms of the personal privileges violated by the report, the 
misreporting--and the malreporting of the amendments offered by my 
colleagues Mr. Scott, Mr. Nadler, and me affected our rights, 
reputation, and conduct. As founder and Chair of the Congressional 
Children's Caucus, a report that cites an amendment offered by me that 
would exempt sexual predators from liability is at the very least 
offensive.
  My constituents and the constituents of my colleagues do read House 
Reports, and the nefarious language that the Chairman avers as 
representative of his true intentions should be highlighted as contrary 
to the ideals on which this House, this government, and this nation 
were established.

                          ____________________