Lloyd Doggett

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. I thank the gentleman for yielding me the time. Mr. Speaker, this bill should be properly entitled the Unilateral Disarmament Act of 1995 because what it is all about is unilaterally disarming our capability to provide for clean air and clean water. It just returns to the old Gingrich-ite philosophy of the environment, ``Polluters know best.'' Well, we do not think they know best, and we think it is essential that this Nation have the capability to provide for clean air and clean water. This is a bill for unilateral disarmament. It says to those who would police the polluters that they will not have the resources to get the job done. This is the same group that tried to tie up and bind and shackle with 17 different binders the right to protect against the environment, and even some elements of their own party rebelled against it and said it would not stand. So now they have come back and they have tried every way they can to cut the power of our law enforcement officers to protect and preserve our environment. It needs to be rejected.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, today we gain new insight into what this new Gingrich-ite majority meant when they said they would give us a new Congress, and we can see it right here on the floor today. They have brought an entirely new institution to this Congress, not new to other countries of the world. It is known as a siesta. You see, at a little after 1 o'clock today, when most Americans were out working hard trying to make ends meet, the Gingrich-ite leadership declared a siesta in the Congress. They said at 1 o'clock, after they had paid to bring back Members of Congress from all of the 50 States to pass a bill this morning that could have been approved last night with ease, to suffer a major defeat today on a piece of legislation that would take money away from veterans' care, they said at 1 o'clock, ``We do not have any more business today. We do not want to work any more.'' And unlike some of our friends in other countries in the world who might take a 2- or-3-hour siesta around noontime, this new Gingrich-ite majority proposes to extend its siesta until midnight and well into tomorrow. It is as if they did not hear the message of the American people that I heard over the Thanksgiving break, a message that said, ``Stop your antics. Get to work.'' The message that said, ``We do not appreciate Speaker Gingrich wasting somewhere between $500 million and $800 million, so zealous with his extremist agenda that he would pay Federal workers not to even work for a week, at the expense of the American taxpayer.'' But instead of coming back to work and actually working through these appropriations bills, they declare a siesta. And is there work left to be done? Well, indeed, if they had not been sleeping on the job or something, we would never have had a Government shutdown in the first place. You see, they had a responsibility to pass some 13 appropriations bills by September 30. Did they do it? No. They passed 2 of 13, a failing grade where I come from down in Texas. Have they done it [[Page H 13770]] today? Have they even gotten half of these bills passed? Well, now, as we begin to approach Christmas, having completed Thanksgiving, they have yet to send to the President's desk almost half of the appropriations bills. Let me review what pends here as these Republicans enjoy their siesta today: The Commerce, Justice, State, and Judiciary appropriations bills have not been presented to this House for action. The District of Columbia appropriations bill, it says in the latest report that conference was continued on November 17, and it is still continued. We do not have the bill out here to act on. The Committee on Foreign Operations, the latest report says the conference deadlocked on November 15. That means that the Senate Republicans and the House Republicans cannot agree on the same bill. So it is not out here for us to act on. The Interior bill, that is the one we defeated just before the Thanksgiving break because of that giveaway that the Gingrich-ite majority wanted to give to the mining companies to take public property and use it for private gain. The Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education bills, they failed to begin floor debate over in the Senate at the end of September. It has not even passed the U.S. Senate. Then the Veterans' Affairs, Housing and Urban Development legislation which was taken up and defeated today, recommitted for the second time, the second time that this House has recommitted that bill, the first time because our Republican colleagues wanted to bind and destroy law enforcement against pollution with some 17 binders, and so it was rejected. They came back kind of with their tails between their legs, saying, ``We really did not mean to do so much damage to the environment as we did.'' Today this House said ``yes,'' but you are doing damage to the veterans that secured this country. You are taking $213 million out of their health care that ought not to be taken out of that health care, and this House soundly rejected and recommitted that bill. We have got half the business and well over half of the appropriations of the Government of the United States that have not been signed into law, and these folks take a siesta for the rest of the day. They say they want a balanced budget. Well, they do not have much balance to the way they are getting that budget. The problem is they do not have any balance in the budget that they propose. I believe in a budget that is balanced. I come from the pay-as-you-go approach of Texas. I want those figures to balance so that we do not leave our grandchildren with debt upon debt. But how about a little balance for the people that are affected by that budget? Oh, yes, they say we have got to sacrifice. They said this morning that those veterans had to sacrifice to the extent of $213 million out of their health care. But what sacrifice do they demand of the most wealthy of our citizens? They said, ``Could you, please, pretty please, take a tax break at the same time we cut the rest of America?'' That is wrong, and so is this siesta.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, this legislation presents us with a rare opportunity in this Congress to work together as people of good will, Democrats and Republicans, in a bipartisan effort to provide reform that people really want. We know that this is a statute that has not been significantly rewritten since 1946 when it was enacted. There has been one failed effort after another. Now is not the time to let the perfect become the enemy of the good. This particular amendment is not a bad idea. In fact, I would support it as a freestanding piece of legislation, and there are numerous opportunities to put this kind of legislation on other legislation. But to put it on this particular bill at this time is to cripple and to defeat this bill. There is only one way to get this legislation passed and to avoid the never-never land of a perfect bill, and that is to defeat this and every other amendment and to put this bill on the President's desk now and get it in place and signed into law by January. That is what we need to do tonight.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, surely all America can give thanks this Thanksgiving for a Thanksgiving truce in a truly senseless war. Our Republican colleagues in the Senate, as well as the President and his staff, deserve our praise for their hard work this weekend to try to reach a Federal budget eventually that will be balanced not only in terms of numbers, but in terms of the way it treats the American people with true fairness. The only way that this agreement was implemented and 800,000 Federal workers returned to work today is because our Democratic colleagues worked together here in the House. I feel good about that. Because of our willingness to work this weekend instead of to quit in the midst of a national crisis, we were here on the floor last night, ready to implement this agreement. Had the adjournment motion that was forced on us on Saturday been approved, we would have had another day of delay for the American people, delay that would have cost them $100 to $150 million for our Federal workers to be idle again. For, you see, from the very beginning, those who forced this crisis intended to pay people for not working for the Federal Government. Eight hundred thousand people were paid for not doing any work during the course of this crisis. Hopefully, those in this House who were so very determined and who spoke with such strident comments to impose their will on America, that they were willing to pay these 800,000 people not to work all of last week, those folks heard the message of the American people that Americans have been saying in one poll after another about the way this whole crisis was handled. To be honest, the cost of that message was fairly dear to the American people. I think it can be estimated at well over a half billion dollars--$100 to $150 million a day. Hopefully the message is now heard and we can refocus on budget priorities, whether we want to give a tax break to the most prosperous Americans or protect our people on Medicare and who rely on educational assistance to have a better tomorrow.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, among those many blessings for which we can give thanks this Thanksgiving, one is our good fortune at being a part of the greatest Nation in the world. Yes, I have listened to those who come almost daily to this House floor to whine about almost everything that has happened in this country over the last six decades, beginning with President Roosevelt signing Social Security into law, something they have never gotten over. But while we are gathered at the Thanksgiving table this Thursday, let us look at our own families and think what we want our national priorities to be. As we look at the oldest member of our family, do we want to deny her health care security just in order to give those who have the most another tax break? As we look at the youngest, do we want to put more obstacles in the way of their educational opportunities so that they, too, can share in the great bounty of this Nation just in order to give the Pentagon $7 billion in costly weapons systems it never asked for? And are all of us going to have to buy bottled water next Thanksgiving because this Congress cannot stand up to the polluter lobby? I think not. The American people can speak out this Thanksgiving about what they have to be thankful for and what they will be thankful for when this budget is concluded.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. What you have just read is a letter from Speaker Gingrich saying that every one of these employees, including all the ones that Members on your side of the aisle have said probably were really nonessential truly anyway, you are going to pay every one of them every penny they would have earned had they been on the job. And so my only question to you is: If you are going to pay them anyway, the American taxpayer has to foot the bill, why will you not let them work?

Mr. DOGGETT. That begs the question. You are paying these people not to work when they ought to be working.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I have a further parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I am well aware of the fact that it has been tabled. That is what I have been talking about the last 5 minutes. My inquiry, Mr. Speaker, is whether or not a discussion of the action in tabling that resolution, and my reading of the resolution that was tabled, would be within the rules of the House, because your previous response to the parliamentary inquiry of the gentleman from Pennsylvania suggests otherwise.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, because the Chair has ruled, if I understand it, in response to the parliamentary inquiry that certain remarks would not conform with the rules of the Chair, and since all of my remarks centered on reading a privileged resolution that the House had just tabled, is it the ruling of the Chair that because the resolution was tabled, it is not proper for consideration here since it dealt with the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and pending business?

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, then is it the ruling of the Chair that the resolution that the House just voted to table on the floor of this House concerning the desire for a report from the committee, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, is improper and cannot be discussed even during special orders?

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I have a parliamentary inquiry.

Mr. DOGGETT. So, reading the resolution would be within the rules of the House?

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, so, the Chair is not saying that the resolution itself, which I read from throughout the course of my remarks, would not be the proper subject of debate here in the course of special orders?

Mr. DOGGETT. And so it is a proper subject.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, why has not the continuing resolution, if the gentleman is so eager for the President to act on it, why is he holding it up?

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, now that the gentleman has reached the point in his presentation where he is taking questions, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, it is correct that we have yet had an opportunity to discuss these complaints, and, yes, they have. And the whole thrust of this resolution is to have someone who is neither Democrat nor Republican participate in an independent consideration of those complaints to find out if they have been partisan or nonpartisan. And, as the resolution so indicates, whereas these procedural irregularities and the unusual delay in the appointment of an independent outside counsel have led to widespread concern that the committee is making special exceptions for the Speaker of the House; and, whereas the integrity of the House depends on the confidence of the American people, and the fairness and impartiality of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct; therefore, be it resolved that the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct should report to the House no later than November 28, 1995, concerning first, the status of the committee's investigation of the complaints against Speaker Gingrich; the committee's disposition with regard to the appointment of a nonpartisan outside counsel and the scope of the counsel's investigation; and, finally, a timetable for committee action on the complaints. That is to say, that the resolution did not go so far as to actually demand the immediate appointment of an outside counsel, but only that the committee come forward and report on what it has been doing throughout this year. Yet, Mr. Speaker, every Republican who voted refused to have even an investigation reported to this House on this critical ethical matter.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, we can have a legitimate dispute over matters such as that which we just heard, knowing a different perspective on some of these issues, knowing that the whole idea of middle class to at least one of our Republican colleagues was that those who earned even as much as $183,000 were lower middle class, but there are some issues that ought to go beyond partisanship. They ought to go beyond differences in philosophy. I think we have seen one of those issues presented in this House tonight. Of the many injustices that have occurred on the floor of this House this year, none, certainly, is any greater than what which we saw tonight. I refer to an injustice not based on what was said here on the floor of this House, but on what was not said. Usually when people on one side or the other complain about an injustice, they are talking about a vote that was taken and many speeches and debate, as we have had here today. But this was the muzzling of debate. This was the gagging of debate. This was an injustice that centered on silence, not on anything that was said. This injustice related to the handling of a privileged resolution that was presented here on the floor of the House tonight, presented by the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Harry Johnston and Mr. Peterson. It concerned a very important matter, that being the ethical standards that prevail in this House or do not prevail in this House. The timing of the consideration of this resolution was interesting, at the end of a long day of debate. The timing of this resolution seemed to be designed, along with the motion to table that immediately cut off consideration of this measure, immediately cut it off without any presentation of the kind of debate that we are seeing here tonight on matters concerning the budget, and yet, which go to the core of the operation of this Congress; that is, the confidence of the American people in the integrity of this body. Let me just read to you, since it was done so hurriedly, and without any opportunity for debate, from this resolution: ``Whereas the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct is currently considering several ethics complaints against Speaker Newt Gingrich''-- and indeed, they are, there have been a number of such complaints-- ``and whereas the committee has traditionally handled such cases by appointing an independent nonpartisan outside counsel,'' a procedure which has been adopted in every major ethics case since the committee was established, and, indeed, that is also accurate; in fact, on at least nine occasions, including Speaker Jim Wright, an independent counsel was appointed--``and whereas, although complaints against Speaker Gingrich have been under consideration for more than 14 months,'' for 14 months, for every day of this great revolutionary new Congress those complaints have been pending and nothing has happened, ``this committee has failed to appoint an outside counsel, and whereas the committee has also deviated from other longstanding precedents and rules of procedure, including its failure to adopt a resolution of preliminary inquiry before calling third-party witnesses and receiving sworn testimony,''--and in the section of the resolution, of course, referring to the rules of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct which, based on the news reports, have not been complied with.

Mr. DOGGETT. For a question, certainly.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, a day late and a dollar short. I wish it were only that big a problem. In fact, our Republican colleagues are about 6 weeks late in getting a budget to President Clinton. We will finally take it up for consideration to go to the President today. They are more than a dollar short. In fact, this week Newt Gingrich will be paying out millions of dollars eventually, millions of dollars to Federal workers who have now been off work for 4 days and Newt Gingrich will pay them for not working. That is the policy of fiscal responsibility that our Republican colleagues are imposing on America. They say they will have a balanced budget today but for seniors who will pay more and get less for Medicare, there is not much balance in it. For working families who will pay more taxes under this budget and get less, there is not much in it. For students who will pay more and get less education, there is not much in it. And for those who care about the environment and who will just get less in this budget, there is not much in it.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. With the parliamentary inquiries? Not with my 1 minute.

Mr. DOGGETT. I thank the Speaker.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. DOGGETT. Point of order, Mr. Speaker. I would like to state my point of order.