John Conyers

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on each side, please?

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to ask the speaker who just finished, if I could gain his attention for a moment. I thank the gentleman for coming back into the well. Does the gentleman agree with me, in examining this bill, that this bill risks default by the United States by requiring a supermajority to raise the debt limit, which is not the case now? I yield to my friend.

Mr. CONYERS. Did the gentleman say yes or no to my question?

Mr. CONYERS. That a supermajority is not required to raise the debt limit under this bill?

Mr. CONYERS. I yield myself an additional minute, and I yield to my friend.

Mr. CONYERS. Thank you. It isn't. And there would be in this bill, would it not?

Mr. CONYERS. I want to thank my colleague for answering the question. I would like now to turn to the gentleman who represents the majority, a distinguished member of the Judiciary Committee, Mr. Goodlatte.

Mr. CONYERS. I yield myself 2 additional minutes. I would like to ask him if he is aware of the fact that H.J. Res. 2 would require a supermajority to raise the debt limit. I'm pleased to yield to the gentleman.

Mr. CONYERS. Did the gentleman answer me with a ``yes''?

Mr. CONYERS. Did the gentleman understand the question?

Mr. CONYERS. Was the answer ``yes'' or ``no'' to my question?

Mr. CONYERS. Then let me ask my colleague this question: Does it presently require a supermajority to raise the debt limit?

Mr. CONYERS. I would like to yield to the distinguished gentleman from Virginia, Bobby Scott.

Mr. CONYERS. Could I conclude on this side by asking my friend from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) if he shares the view offered by Mr. Scott?

Mr. CONYERS. Could I get some time from the other side to continue this discussion?

Mr. CONYERS. The time is already allotted for tomorrow. The time we use tonight will not be put on tomorrow. We have divided the time up, so you have a few minutes left if the gentleman cares to share it. Parliamentary Inquiry

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, how much time is remaining?

Mr. CONYERS. I yield myself 1\1/4\ minutes, the time allotted us for tonight. I think the instructive discussion that we've had here tonight illustrates an irreconcilable problem with the requirement that a supermajority is necessary under H.J. Res. 2 to raise the debt limit. It's frequently difficult enough to raise the debt limit with a simple majority, so I'm sure that everyone in this Chamber will realize, by raising the requirement by a considerable figure, it is going to make it nearly impossible to raise the debt limit. We've just gone through a summer of problems of raising the debt limit by a simple majority. Now, tonight, we are told that we're going to make this a constitutional proposition, which will make it even more difficult. Just for the record, for the last time, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia for an explanation: Would you explain to me how raising the debt limit to a supermajority is going to facilitate a more progressive or operative Congress.

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

Mr. CONYERS. We have no more time.

Mr. CONYERS

Mr. CONYERS. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Your experience in your State legislature and your legal experience really have impressed me that your amendment, and we haven't talked about this today on H.R. 822, is extremely important. I hope my colleagues will join with you.

Mr. CONYERS. I thank the gentleman. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Members of the House, the measure that we have under consideration today is a very curious one in that there is some misunderstanding of what the constitutional right to carry loaded, hidden guns in public is really all about. I would begin our discussion pointing out that under the proposal before us, a concealed firearm permit issued by any State would be valid in every State that allows a concealed carry provision. So, for example, a visitor to my home State of Michigan would be allowed to carry a loaded, hidden weapon in public, even if he has not met the minimum requirements to do so mandated by our State law. Different States have enacted different requirements for carrying concealed weapons within their borders. And although Federal law prohibits individuals with Federal convictions from possessing a weapon, 38 of our States have chosen to deny concealed carry licenses to individuals with convictions for certain misdemeanor offenses. I would like to start our discussion off with the fact that there are so many members of law enforcement, so many members of the government, so many members of our editorials--please consider with me, my colleagues in the House, that every major law enforcement organization in the United States of America opposes the measure that is on the floor today, H.R. 822. Every single organization. These organizations include the International Association of Chiefs of Police; the Major Cities Chiefs Association, which includes the 56 largest cities in the United States of America; the Police Foundation; the National Latino Peace Officers Association; and the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives. We have letters from 600 mayors of the cities in the United States. The National Network to End Domestic Violence has sent us letters. There have been editorials in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the St. Petersburg Times, and they have all submitted letters. I conclude my opening remarks by observing that there is no constitutional right to carry loaded, hidden guns in public. One of the things I hope we will be able to persuade you on is that the Supreme Court case of 2008, entitled, District of Columbia v. Heller is the case that the majority of the Court ruled, and Justice Scalia wrote this decision, that while the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding citizens to use arms in defense of their home and bans on carrying in public were presumptively lawful, it went on to say that the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment, that the prohibitions were lawful; and Justice Scalia's majority decision in that landmark case rendered 3 years ago stated the Second Amendment is not unlimited and not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever or for whatever purpose. I cite the Supreme Court decision 128 2783 of 2008, the District of Columbia v. Heller. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CONYERS. Madam Chairman, I am pleased to recognize the former chair of the Constitution Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, Jerry Nadler of New York, for as much time as he may consume.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Florida (Mr. Deutch).