John Boehner

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. I yield to the gentleman from Tennessee.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from California for yielding me this time and remind my colleagues that this motion to instruct conferees is a nonbinding motion. It is within the rules of the House to allow the minority to bring the issue to the floor and to have a debate; but we all know that, any of us that have been in this body for some time, that it is an opportunity to make political hay. After all, it is an even-numbered year. Now, we all know in even-numbered years that all of the Members of the House are up for reelection or there is going to be an election and all the seats are going to be contested. What that means to me in most cases, unfortunately, is that the rhetoric in this body will certainly increase. I think it is a little early in the year for that to occur, but obviously it is not too early for some. We have had an awful lot of debate here, and we have heard mention about the 100 days that we have not acted on this bill. All of my colleagues know that we have been in recess, out of session, back in our districts for the last 2\1/2\ months. Since the week before Thanksgiving, we have been home with our families and our constituents trying to deal with what is happening out in the real world. To expect that Members were going to come back here over Christmas, as an example, to deal with this issue certainly is not realistic. Having said all of that, the chairman of the conference, Senator Nickles, has announced that the conferees are going to meet before the February recess. The Speaker of the House and the majority leader of the House, have made it clear that they want this issue on the floor of the House before the Easter recess.

Mr. BOEHNER. Reclaiming my time, certainly all of us, even though we were not here in Washington, were back in our districts working. Part of our job occurs in our districts. I am sure the gentleman from Tennessee was back in his district working diligently, every day, as I was around my district. So we are going to have this bill back on the floor. But one of the concerns that I have heard raised here subtly today I heard raised more pointedly yesterday in a different forum when we talked about the need for patients' rights, and we all understand that there is a reasonable way we can approach this. But beyond the issue of patients' rights, we all know the number one issue in the health care system in America today is the fact that over 44 million Americans have no health insurance at all. We have to be very careful as we move to enact patients' rights that we do not increase the number of uninsured. We ought to follow the Hippocratic oath that says first do no harm. But as we try to provide better access for people who have no health insurance, one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle yesterday actually termed it a poison pill for patients' rights. We have heard other references here today, rather subtle, that that can wait, that we can deal with that later. Ladies and gentlemen, if we are going to move reasonable patients' rights to help the American people who are stuck in managed care, the least we can do is to do something to help the 44 million Americans who have no health insurance whatsoever. Why can we not provide association health plans for them, refundable tax credits for them, medical savings accounts if it will help? Anything that we can do to help employers provide more insurance to their employees, we ought to be doing it. But the reason I think that we are hearing access provisions, helping the uninsured, it being described as a poison pill, it is kind of a code word, kind of a code word to what the real plan here is, because I think, as I said before, this is an election year; and I think some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would just as soon have this as a political issue in November than actually do something on behalf of the American people. I am just listening, and I am watching and I am wondering why we are dealing with this motion to instruct on the floor today. But I can tell you this: this conference will produce a reasonable approach to patients' rights and a reasonable approach to helping insure the 44 million Americans who have no health insurance. That bill will come back here to the floor of the House, and then I want to see where my colleagues are, whether they will be willing to stand up and deal with this issue in a balanced way. The time of truth will come very shortly.

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, House Concurrent Resolution 221, as amended by the Senate, authorizes the printing of six publications, of ``How Our Laws Are Made''; ``Our American Government''; the U.S. Constitution, the pocket-sized version; the U.S. Constitution, a document-sized version; the ``Capitol Builder,'' which is a shorthand journal of Captain Montgomery C. Meigs; and the publication of the ``U.S. Capitol: A Chronicle of Construction, Design and Politics.'' The Senate amendment to the House resolution added both ``The Capitol Builder'' and ``The U.S. Capitol'' to the printing resolution. The total cost from the GPO, their estimate for these publications, is approximately $1.3 million. I would ask my colleagues to join with me in approving this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 221) entitled ``Concurrent resolution authorizing printing of the brochures entitled `How Our Laws Are Made' and `Our American Government', the pocket version of the United States Constitution, and the document- sized, annotated version of the United States Constitution.''

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. I yield to the gentleman from Virginia.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Combest), the chairman of the committee, and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm), the ranking member, for the job that they have done. Specifically, I want to congratulate the gentleman from Virginia (Chairman Goodlatte) and commend him on his efforts here today regarding the EBT bill. This common sense piece of legislation will achieve portability for the delivery of food stamp benefits in every State across the Nation. The legislation that my colleague has introduced is very important as the States make the transition from paper coupons or food stamps to a more efficient electronic system. As my colleagues know, the State of Ohio has been an innovator in this area, having developed an extremely successful Smart Card program for the delivery of food stamp benefits to more than 300,000 recipients in my home State. In this regard, I wish to engage my colleague from Virginia in a colloquy to receive assurances that his bill will in no way harm the innovative technology that Ohio has adopted for delivering benefits.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I appreciate these very important clarifications with regard to how legislation relates to Smart Card changes, especially my home State of Ohio.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I want to thank the chairman for his comments. As I understand his comments, Ohio would not, then, be required to change its off-line system to an on-line system under this proposal?

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of the concurrent resolution just considered.

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this resolution is very straightforward and simply authorizes the use of the Chamber for a photo while we are in session. The Speaker would set the date for such photo and payment as authorized from the applicable accounts of the House. As Members know, in the last session of Congress there was a photo taken of all of the Members of the House, something that was rather routine in sessions past, but over a period of 3 or 4 sessions it did not occur. Several years ago when this was done the Members were very supportive of the effort, and the Committee on House Administration voted for it. The Members thereof have suggested that the House take another photograph in this session. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 407) permitting official photographs of the House of Representatives to be taken while the House is in actual session.

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for his support, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this resolution authorizes the use of the Rotunda of the Capitol for the Holocaust Days of Remembrance ceremony. This ceremony will be on May 4, 2000. The statute creating the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council directs that the council shall provide for appropriate ways for the Nation to commemorate the Days of Remembrance as an annual, national, civic commemoration of the Holocaust, and shall encourage and sponsor appropriate observances of such Days of Remembrance throughout the United States. The purpose of the Days of Remembrance is to ask citizens to reflect on the Holocaust, to remember the victims, and to strengthen our sense of democracy and human rights. The event in the Rotunda of the Capitol is the centerpiece of similar Holocaust remembrance ceremonies that take place throughout the United States. The first Days of Remembrance ceremonies in the Rotunda occurred in 1979 and has been an annual event except during the period when the Rotunda was undergoing repairs. The theme of this year's commemoration is, and I will quote, ``The Holocaust and the New Century: The Imperative to Remember.'' I urge my colleagues to support the resolution. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 244) permitting the use of the Rotunda of the Capitol for a ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of victims of the Holocaust.

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on House Administration be discharged from further consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 76) waiving certain enrollment requirements for the remainder of the first session of the 106th Congress with respect to any bill or joint resolution making general appropriations or continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2000, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from New York, for yielding. I think all of my colleagues know that U.S. Code requires engrossed bills that passed both Houses to be printed on parchment in a manner determined by the Joint Committee on Printing. For large bills such as the appropriation measures that are still under debate and discussion, this requires many additional hours of time that may in fact be saved and allow us to complete our work sooner if this statute is set aside on a temporary basis. As most of my colleagues know, this is typically done at the end of every session of Congress, and we can in fact finish our work in a more timely manner and deliver these bills more quickly to the White House for their signature.

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Ehrlich), the sponsor of this legislation.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1693) to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to clarify the overtime exemption for employees engaged in fire protection activities.

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1693 is a simple and noncontroversial bill, introduced by our friend from Maryland (Mr. Ehrlich), that would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to clarify the existing overtime exemption for firefighters. The Committee on Education and the Workforce reported the bill yesterday without amendment and by voice vote. The bill has major bipartisan support in the House and it is supported by both labor and management, who would be affected by the change under the bill. In addition, the National Association of Counties, the National Association of Towns and Townships, the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities are supporters of this bill. Generally, under the Fair Labor Standards Act, workers are entitled to overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 within a week. The act contains unlimited exemption for overtime, under Section 7(k), for employees of public agencies who are engaged in fire protection activities. The firefighter exemption allows employees engaged in fire protection activities additional scheduling flexibility in recognition of the extended periods that firefighters are often on duty. Employees who are covered by Section 7(k) may work up to 212 hours within a period of 28 consecutive days before triggering the overtime pay requirement. The Department of Labor's regulations specify that rescue and ambulance service workers, sometimes referred to as emergency medical services personnel, may be eligible for the firefighter exemption if they perform duties that are an integral part of the agency's fire protection activities, but an employee may not perform activities unrelated to fire protection for more than 20 percent of the employee's total hours worked. Many State and local governments employ EMS personnel who receive training and work schedules and maintain levels of preparedness which is very similar to that of firefighters. In the past, these types of employees fit within the 7(k) overtime exemption. In recent years, however, some courts have narrowly interpreted the 7(k) exemption and held that emergency medical services personnel do not come within the exemption because the bulk of their time is spent engaged in nonfire protection activities. These lawsuits have resulted in State and local governments being liable for millions of dollars in back pay, attorneys fees and court costs. So there is a real need to modernize this area of the Fair Labor Standards Act and to clearly specify who can be considered a fire protection employee for purposes of the exemption. H.R. 1693 clarifies the law by specifying the duties of employees who would be eligible for the limited overtime exemption. The bill would ensure that firefighters who are cross-trained as emergency medical technicians, HAZMAT responders and search and rescue specialists would be covered by the exemption even though they may not spend all of their time performing activities directly related to fire protection. Finally, the bill would clear up the confusion that employers face in trying to interpret the law. A misinterpretation of the law could needlessly expose local governments to significant financial liability and dramatically increase the cost of providing adequate fire protection services. H.R. 1693 is a narrow bill, but one that is important in helping State and local governments provide fire protection and emergency medical services in a most effective and efficient way possible. I would urge my colleagues to support this clarification. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BOEHNER

Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks on H.R. 1693.