[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3156-3160]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           ELECTING OFFICERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a privileged resolution (H. Res. 129) 
and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 129

       Resolved, That Lorraine C. Miller of the State of Texas, 
     be, and is hereby, chosen Clerk of the House of 
     Representatives, effective February 15, 2007; and
       That Daniel P. Beard of the State of Maryland be, and is 
     hereby, chosen Chief Administrative Officer of the House of 
     Representatives, effective February 15, 2007.

  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to have an opportunity to speak 
on the resolution before its immediate adoption.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will distribute the time.
  The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) and the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, we will not take, certainly, the hour that is 
allotted; but I first of all want to say something about the two 
individuals who have just resigned their appointments as Clerk and as 
Chief Administrative Officer of the House of Representatives.
  Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to serve from 1987 to 2000 on the 
House Administration Committee and worked with my friend, Mr. Ehlers, 
Mr. Thomas, and others. I was a member of the House Administration 
Committee on which Vic Fazio, our former colleague from California, was 
the ranking member. He and Mr. Thomas came together and selected Jay 
Eagen to be the Chief Administrative Officer.
  I think it would be inappropriate if I did not rise and congratulate 
Mr. Eagen on the job that he has done. I believe that Jay Eagen has 
brought a degree of professional management to this House of 
Representatives, which has been a credit to the institution and a 
credit to all of the Members, and a credit, I might say, to my 
colleagues on the Republican side, to the Republican leadership on this 
issue, and I congratulate them for that.
  Mr. Eagen is someone who has worked on this Hill for many years. He 
will be leaving the Hill and leaving this city and moving his family to 
the west, and we wish him the very, very best.
  Mr. Speaker, Karen Haas, who has been the Clerk and who submitted her 
resignation is, as well, someone who has worked for this institution, 
cares deeply about the House, and has comported herself, although for a 
relatively short period of time as the Clerk of our House, in a way 
that brought honor to the Office of Clerk and brought credit to the 
House of Representatives.
  I know from my perspective personally and from Speaker Pelosi, and I 
both want to, on behalf of our caucus, extend to them our deepest 
thanks and gratitude for the service that they have rendered to the 
House of Representatives and to our country. Both of them, I know, have 
very exciting things to come. They are both young,

[[Page 3157]]

they both have much to offer, and we wish them the very best.
  Mr. Speaker, I will reserve the balance of my comments on Ms. Miller 
and Mr. Beard and would certainly yield now to Mr. Ehlers, who may also 
want to say something.
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I would join my colleague from Maryland in 
commending Jay Eagen and Karen Haas for the tremendous job they have 
done, and, before Karen, Jeff Trandahl, who served temporarily as CAO 
during the bridge time before the selection of Mr. Eagen, and who also 
served as the Clerk of the House very ably.
  They both, Jay Eagen and Karen Haas, have done a great job in that 
office. The House has run very, very well as a result, and I commend 
them and wish them well in the future. I am certain that they have 
bright futures based on the excellent work that they did here.
  I also would like to comment about the appointments that have been 
made. The new appointment for the Clerk, Ms. Miller, from everything I 
see, is an outstanding appointment. We recognize that as traditionally 
the appointment of the Speaker and can be made solely by the Speaker 
and has been in the past.
  I look forward to good things from her. She is obviously very 
capable, has an outstanding record in working in the House, the Senate, 
and various other places. I look forward to good work from her.
  In regard to the selected candidate for Chief Administrative Officer 
for the House, Mr. Beard, I do not object to his appointment. He is, I 
think, of relatively good background and should be able to manage the 
job, at least I seriously hope so.
  But I have serious concerns about the lack of transparency and the 
selection process that resulted in his appointment. Just to give a 
better history, when I first arrived here, it was shortly before the 
Republicans took over the majority, and there had been considerable 
confusion in the House. We had the bank scandal, the post office 
scandal and so forth. A position was created, I forget the precise 
title, but something along the line of the director of the 
nonlegislative and financial functions of the House of Representatives.
  The Speaker at that time, who was a Democrat, since they were in the 
majority, appointed a person to fill that post. It was General Wishart, 
I believe, and he resigned after several months saying basically he 
could not do the job, given the parameters that were imposed upon it.
  When the Republicans took over the House of Representatives, they 
also appointed, and it was largely a Speaker's appointment at that 
time, appointed someone to serve as the Chief Administrative Officer of 
the House. That position was created and described by the new majority.
  Mr. Faulkner had a good resume and had a lot of good ideas, but, 
frankly, did not really meet the needs that we had for that position at 
that time. We then decided, and I believe Mr. Hoyer was on the 
committee at the same time with me, and we simply decided that we had 
to make this as nonpartisan a position as possible.
  So we formed a group, two Republicans, two Democrats, and they 
conducted a nationwide search with a search firm to find the best 
person for the Chief Administrative Officer position.
  They ended up selecting someone from the House of Representatives, 
someone who was familiar with it, but also someone with extensive 
administrative background who did a tremendous job of operating this 
institution since that time.
  The main point I want to make is a process was set up that was 
bipartisan. It resulted in an excellent appointment, and I believe we 
should use that same process again.
  In fact, I felt so strongly about it, I sent a letter to the Speaker 
last week pointing out that we should use that same process again. 
Barely was the letter delivered that she announced publicly that she 
had selected a new CAO, without using that process at all, without 
input from the minority party. Simply, we had the courtesy of chatting 
with the new appointee, but nothing to say in the appointment or 
whether or not that person should have the appointment.
  I have met with him; I recognize he has considerable administrative 
ability. He has been around a long time, but I am very concerned 
because we did not use the same process. I think this new appointee is 
going to owe his allegiance to only one person, that is the Speaker of 
the House, and I don't believe that is the best way to operate the 
House of Representatives.
  At the same time, should anything deleterious or improper happen, we 
recognize where the responsibility for that will lie, because it will 
be with the person who made the appointment.
  But I have firsthand knowledge, having served on the House 
Administration Committee now for over 12 years, firsthand knowledge of 
the important role the Chief Administrative Officer plays in the House 
operations, and it is an extremely important job.
  This is a complex organization on the Hill, over 10,000 employees. 
The position has many responsibilities that are of significant 
consequence to the House of Representatives.
  While the proper administration of the House is ultimately the 
responsibility of the majority, the successful operation of the House 
is most certainly not a partisan manner.
  Republicans and Democrats alike maintain a shared investment in 
preserving and building upon the professional improvements made by the 
House Chief Administrative Officer over the last 12 years.
  In 1997, as I mentioned, the last occasion a new CAO was appointed, a 
search committee was constituted that, as I said, required a unanimous 
decision from all search committee members in order to select a 
candidate for the position of Chief Administrative Officer.
  That last provision, I think, is very important, to ensure that it 
was not a partisan position required that both Republicans and both 
Democrats had to vote to select the final candidate for the position.
  At that time, our current House majority leader, my colleague from 
Maryland, stated that the formulation of a search committee comprised 
of the leaders of both parties ``was done to assure that we would have 
a bipartisan agreement on an administrator for the business of the 
House.''
  Mr. Hoyer also stated that what this House needs is a bipartisan and 
effectively nonpartisan way to assure ourselves and the American people 
that the business of the House, the paying of our bills, the managing 
of our information systems, all of that which has nothing to do with 
the formulation of the policy, but everything to do with the effective 
management of the people's House, is being done in a proper fashion.
  Now, I am not quoting this to throw the words in Mr. Hoyer's face. 
That is not my intent at all. It is simply my intent to show how at 
that time we worked very hard to get a bipartisan agreement. That 
bipartisan agreement, which Mr. Hoyer spoke of, resulted in the 
appointment of Jay Eagen, our current Chief Administrative Officer, who 
has served us so well for a number of years.
  Under Mr. Eagen's tenure, just as an example, the House has achieved 
eight consecutive clean opinions from independent auditors, an 
impressive result by any measure. This should be contrasted with the 
result when the Republicans first took office, we asked for an 
independent outside audit, and the auditors came back and said the 
books are such a mess, we cannot even audit them; you will have to 
construct an entire new financial management system.
  I was pleased that since I had helped develop the computer system 
that I was able to help develop a system that was appropriate for that 
task. I think all of this together has led to the clean audits that we 
have had for a number of years.
  I certainly support the comments that Mr. Hoyer made some years ago. 
They were very appropriate. They described the procedure accurately; 
and his points, as he made them, I totally agree that the appointment 
of a post was such a significant impact to this

[[Page 3158]]

institution, we should be able to put aside our party affiliations and 
work together to find a suitable candidate.
  I wish I could make a comparable statement today. I wish that such a 
bipartisan process had been followed this time. Instead, I am left only 
to express my sincere disappointment that it did not take place.
  Let me make it clear, the qualifications of Mr. Beard are not under 
attack; but the process that Speaker Pelosi administered to make this 
appointment is. I think we should have had the same process, and I am 
disappointed that the Speaker chose not to do that.
  Without a fair, open and competitive process, there simply is no way 
to determine whether the selection is in the best interest of the 
House, and the complete absence of transparency is cause for alarm for 
those who value the integrity of this institution.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOYER. I will tell my friend, I don't have any other speakers on 
this side. Do you have a speaker?
  Mr. EHLERS. Yes, I have several.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California, a 
newly appointed member of the Committee on House Administration, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).
  Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. I thank the gentleman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to echo the words of those who have spoken 
the words about the job that Jay Eagen and Karen Haas have done. They 
have served this body well. They have done us honor by their service. I 
am sure they will continue with honorable service in the future.
  When I returned to the House of Representatives after being away for 
16 years, I observed that there were some things that were better about 
this House and some things that were worse about this House.

                              {time}  1415

  I noted that there was always a partisanship in this House, but there 
appeared to be a harder edge to that partisanship. And one of the 
things that struck me was that we needed to be around here more often. 
That is why I, frankly, am one of those on this side of the aisle that 
believes that attempting to go to a 5-day workweek not only is good in 
terms of the product that we will put out eventually, when we actually 
do go to 5-day workweeks, but the interchange and the interplay and the 
opportunity for Members to deal with one another and get to know one 
another I think may very well take the hard edge off the partisanship 
that is always going to be a part of the House when you have strong 
feelings argued by Members on both sides.
  At the same time, I must say it is a disappointment, as a Member of 
the House Administration Committee, to see the manner in which the 
decision was made to choose a Chief Administrative Officer.
  When I served here before, there is no doubt that the administration 
of this place was in a mess. You could ask questions and get no 
answers. You could attempt to try and decipher how this place was 
organized, and you could not find out. You would ask questions, and you 
would get a wink and a nod and a sense of don't ask, don't tell. You 
would try and find, for legitimate reasons, information; and you would 
find that either that was not made available to you or that it could 
not be made available to you.
  And since that time, primarily I believe because of the institution 
of the position of Chief Administrative Officer and the organization 
that flow from that, it has changed. So I was trying to look back at 
the experience of the House to see how this was made and how the 
decision was made to fill that position.
  When I discovered that both the Republican and the Democratic sides 
had come together stressing bipartisanship, making a national search, 
attempting to try and find the best possible person for the job but, 
above that, requiring unanimous support from both sides of the aisle, 
it seemed to me that that was an encouraging step towards righting a 
wrong that existed in this House.
  And that is why, even though I do not know Mr. Beard, and I will take 
on its face the recommendations that have been made on the other side 
about Mr. Beard, it is a missed opportunity we had in this House to 
manifest an effort in one of the legitimate areas where bipartisanship 
should reign, that is, in filling the position of someone who is to be 
the chief administrator of this body. It is a sorely missed 
opportunity.
  I know that we should not be complaining about process, and people 
are tired about complaining about process, and I am tired about hearing 
the complaints about process. But this was a unique opportunity for us 
to work together, not as Democrats or Republicans but Members of the 
House of Representatives who have respect for this institution, who 
understand the necessity of having this place run at that level on a 
businesslike basis so that every Member can feel that the person who 
filled that job was chosen by the entire membership and that no one has 
to feel that they have allegiance only to one side.
  It is very difficult in this place, because of the way it is 
organized, for us to find that sort of sweet spot, if you will, in the 
activities in which we are involved. This was one of those chances, and 
I am very sorry that we rejected the experience and the precedent of 
the recent past in making this selection.
  I join the gentleman from Maryland and others in hoping that Mr. 
Beard will do an excellent job. It is in the interests of all of us 
that he does an excellent job. My only point is this was a tremendous 
opportunity for us to remove partisanship, to work together, as the 
gentleman suggested a number of years ago when the selection of Mr. 
Eagen was made.
  My only hope is that this does not suggest how things will be done in 
the future when there is abundant reason for us to work together as 
Members of the House rather than as Democrats and Republicans.
  Mr. Speaker, with that, I congratulate Mr. Beard on his selection. I 
hope he will do the best for us, as Mr. Eagen has done. I only lament 
the fact that we had an opportunity that we missed.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I appreciate the comments. I appreciated my comments when I made 
them. I still want you to know that I appreciate them, and I think that 
is a good practice.
  I had the opportunity of sitting down with Mr. Beard just a few days 
ago, essentially, almost verbatim, in terms of how I believe he ought 
to operate his office in the sense that this is a business office, this 
is not a partisan office. Hopefully, he will respond to doing what is 
in the best business management practice, best practices as well as his 
own judgment without respect to party or partisanship. I would hope 
that that would happen. I expect it to happen.
  But I appreciate the comments that have been made.
  I want to say that, also, I am strongly in support of Lorraine 
Miller. This is a historic appointment, first African American to serve 
as an officer of the House, not just as Clerk of the House but as an 
officer of the House.
  Lorraine Miller has served for three Speakers now. She served 
President Clinton in the White House. She is president of the NAACP in 
Washington, D.C. She is an extraordinarily knowledgeable, able 
individual; and she will be a tremendous asset to this institution and 
I think will send a very strong and powerful message to all of America 
about inclusion, as the election of our Speaker did.
  Mr. Beard, as some of you know, has more than three decades of 
experience in policy and executive management, including senior 
positions in the House of Representatives, the United States Senate, 
the White House and the Interior Department, as well as the Library of 
Congress. Obviously, he has a long, distinguished career in management 
and, as such, is a professional appointment.
  Again, I appreciate the comments that have been made. Mr. Speaker, I

[[Page 3159]]

strongly support the nomination of both, because I believe both will 
serve this institution in a professional manner that brings credit on 
their offices and on this institution.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Clyburn be able to 
manage the balance of time available to me.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for his 
comments.
  I would also echo his comments about Mrs. Miller. I was astounded at 
her resume. In fact, I would love to have a resume that complete 
myself. She has served government in so many different agencies and in 
so many different ways that I am certain that she will perform very, 
very well as the Clerk of the House.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to Mr. McCarthy of California, a brand 
new member of the Committee on House Administration but one with 
considerable experience on it because of his previous work as a staff 
member for the Honorable Bill Thomas, who chaired the committee.
  Mr. McCARTHY of California. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today actually for two reasons, to congratulate 
Mrs. Miller, rightfully so. She was selected, rightfully so, that the 
Speaker was able to appoint her. But today I actually rise in 
disappointment, disappointed in this resolution.
  As the Member said, I am a new Member from California. But I am not 
new to this House. I had the pleasure of serving Mr. Thomas, who had 
served as the chairman of House Administration in 1995.
  I know the work that was done and the respect for this House on both 
sides of the aisle. I never questioned the respect for this institution 
on either side. But to go about in bringing an audit to this House I 
knew the work that needed to be done. I worked as a staffer, and I 
found out in 1995 when we went to do the first audit, we did not keep 
enough books to even have an independent audit.
  And what has transpired, in the last 8 years, we have had a clean, 
independent audit. And how were we able to achieve that? This body was 
able to achieve that by being bipartisan in the selection of the chief 
administrative officer, and to do this resolution today is actually a 
step backwards.
  Transparency in this House, both sides will agree, is the best thing 
for the House of Representatives; and my question today is, I do not 
question the credentials of Mr. Beard. Will he make a great CAO? I do 
not know, quite frankly, because he has never come before us. We have 
never had the ability to go for the search, and we have actually done a 
disjustice to him, because we have gone through to select and not even 
empower him, when both sides of the aisle could go by and make a 
selection. That would empower that office in a bipartisan manner, much 
like we have done in the past.
  My biggest disappointment is this side of the aisle was ready to 
work. I know the ranking member had sent a letter to the new Speaker to 
ask about doing it just like we did in 1997, where somebody from the 
Democrats and some from the Republicans got together and agreed 
unanimously. That is the respect of this office.
  On my first day on this floor, I listened intently. I came with no 
animosity. I came to work together. I came to find common ground. And 
up in that top, I listened to the Speaker when she said, this is about 
partnership not partisanship.
  But today is a step backwards. This was the opportunity to move 
forward in a partisanship much like we have done in 1997, much as 
history has shown. And I will tell you, in the end, the respect for 
this House has to come from both sides of the aisle that we have, and 
we have to do it when it comes to the resolution.
  Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I, too, wish to offer my congratulations to 
those who have done so well, Mr. Speaker, Karen Haas and Mr. Jay Eagen 
in their duties and responsibilities to all of us as Members of this 
body.
  I am a little bit interested in some of the convenient memory that is 
taking place here. I happen to recall, Mr. Speaker, that in 1995 we had 
a CAO appointed; and, of course, I was a member of the bipartisan group 
that was selected by this body to hire Mr. Eagen. I was one of the ones 
that interviewed him, as well as others, and was one of the ones that 
decided to put him in the capacity that he is in.
  So I just wanted to say to my friends on the other side that we hired 
Mr. Eagen to clean up a mess that was not created by those who were in 
power. It was created by the gentleman who took the office in 1995.
  I would want us to be careful about how we recall the history of 
this, because that is the way all of this developed, and I was on that 
group that helped to clean it up with the hiring of Mr. Eagen. He has 
done a professional job. I want to thank him for that.
  I, too, have met with Mr. Beard; and I have known Mrs. Lorraine 
Miller for a long, long time. I think she is an excellent choice. I 
think she is going to do great work for this institution, and I join 
with those who see this as a history-making and I think marble-ceiling-
shattering appointment.
  But when I met with Mr. Beard I said to him that I recognized his 
professional background. But I also said to him that I had one wish of 
him, that he carry out his duties and responsibilities in a 
professional manner. But I said to him when I spoke with him that this 
is my first elected job. I have been director or manager of something 
all of my life before coming here.

                              {time}  1430

  And one of the things I learned as a manager is that you have to try 
to balance efficiency and effectiveness. And in order to do the work of 
this body, I want all of those people who assume positions to be 
efficient. But I also would like to see the work done be effective. And 
to do so, we have to, I think, recognize the individual worth that 
exists in every human being. There are a lot of people working in and 
around this building who we sometimes don't see, but they come under 
the purview of the Chief Administrative Officer. So I asked Mr. Beard 
to remember, as he carried out his duties and responsibilities, that we 
must always work to balance out efficiency and effectiveness. So I 
think they will make good additions to the work here in this body, and 
I want to thank them for being willing to serve and thank the Speaker 
for making this appointment.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Burgess).
  Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, I too want to join my colleagues at wishing 
a fond and reluctant farewell to Jay Eagen and Karen Haas. They have 
both served this institution with great distinction and reflected well 
on the institution of the House.
  But I rise today to honor Lorraine Miller of Fort Worth, Texas, on 
her appointment as Clerk of the House of Representatives. Of course, as 
Clerk of the House of Representatives, Ms. Miller's responsibilities 
will include but not be limited to the page board, congressional travel 
reports and disclosure forms, the voting system, oversight of the 
legislative operation of the House floor. She is well prepared for 
this. She has worked at the highest levels of government, which have 
contributed to her leadership abilities and her knowledge of 
management.
  The role of the Clerk is demanding and requires someone with great 
intellect. Ms. Miller will certainly bring strength and diversity to 
the Office of Clerk as the first African American woman to hold this 
top House position.
  Ms. Miller first worked for the House of Representatives for U.S. 
Congressman Jim Wright back in Fort Worth, Texas, when he was majority 
leader. She moved on to work for then-Speaker Tom Foley, U.S. 
Congressman John Lewis, and finally the current speaker, Speaker 
Pelosi. Ms. Miller also worked as deputy assistant to the president of

[[Page 3160]]

Legislative Affairs for the House of Representatives during the 
administration of Bill Clinton. She additionally held positions at the 
Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission.
  It is with great honor that I recognize Ms. Lorraine C. Miller for 
decades of hard work and selfless dedication. I want to join her 
friends and family, both here in Washington, D.C. and particularly back 
home in Fort Worth, Texas, where I represent, in congratulating her on 
this prestigious milestone. She has been an inspiration and a role 
model to many, and I know she will continue to be a role model to many 
of the young men and women who will watch her progress with pride here 
in the House of Representatives. And I, for one, look forward to 
working with her here in Congress.
  Mr. CLYBURN. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, in that case I will make my final comments. 
I assume the gentleman from South Carolina is able to close right after 
that.
  Just hearing this debate reminds me again of all the things that 
happened. And first of all, I have to clarify that Mr. Eagen did not 
have to clear up a mess left by Mr. Faulkner. Mr. Faulkner may or may 
not have been the best choice for CAO at the time he took the job, but 
certainly improved the situation. And I was there. I saw the books as 
they were, ledger cards made out in pencil with erasures in the ledger 
book, an erasure of a number filled in with $2,500,000 just to make the 
books balance. I have seen those books. I know the facts. It was a mess 
after 40 years of the rule of one party.
  Now, I am not defending or criticizing either General Wishart or Scot 
Faulkner. They were there. They did the best job they could in very 
difficult circumstances. But they were not there very long.
  The point is simply that when we followed a good process, when we 
used a bipartisan process, we appointed someone who has served for a 
number of years and has served extremely well.
  You know as well as I that if you hire a person, that person's 
loyalty is going to be to you. It is very important that this position 
be operated in a bipartisan fashion. And since the Speaker has 
appointed Mr. Beard, no matter how capable he is, no matter how much he 
tries, he will be suspected of partisanship in his decisions.
  Daniel Beard may, in fact, be the right person to lead the CAO 
organization, and I truly hope that he is. However, given the selection 
process, there is simply no way of knowing that with any degree of 
confidence. This appointment could and should have occurred with the 
full confidence of all Members of the House. Unfortunately, the burden 
of proof now lies with Mr. Beard and, ultimately, Speaker Pelosi, to 
ensure that Mr. Beard is able to maintain the level of skill, 
professionalism and bipartisanship we have come to expect from the 
House CAO.
  Mr. Speaker, I demand a division of the question on the adopting of 
the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question will be divided.
  Mr. EHLERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CLYBURN. I yield back the balance of my time, Mr. Speaker.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the resolution.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question on adopting the resolution is 
divided.
  First, the question is on adopting the first portion of the question 
(relating to the election of Clerk).
  The first portion of the question was adopted.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Now, the question is on adopting the second 
portion of the question (relating to the election of Chief 
Administrative Officer).
  The second portion of the question was adopted.
  A motion to reconsider the adoption of the resolution was laid on the 
table.

                          ____________________