Lloyd Doggett

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me. Mr. Speaker, it was very thoughtful of the Committee on Rules to put some of the really critical issues of the Nation before us in the amendments that they permitted us to consider. We got to consider flowers, we got to consider whether there would be elevator operators, we got to consider a number of other matters of similar import, and yet, on the critical issue of whether the ties that bind legislators to gifts would be approved, we were denied the opportunity to even present it for a vote on the floor of this Congress. Mr. Speaker, that goes to the core of the problem in this Congress of business as usual. Mr. Speaker, there is a need for us to be able to present the American people with a clear choice of whether we are going to end gifts, freebies, free trips, or we are not going to end them. This motion is one way to do that. It is an up-or-down vote. If Members believe in continuing the gifts, if they believe in continuing the freebies, then vote against the motion of the gentleman from California [Mr. Miller]. However, if Members think we ought to do something to clean up this House, this is the opportunity to do it. Some of us have taken a voluntary gift ban agreement and have signed off, and we return these gifts and these freebies, and deny these tickets and special benefits. However, this is a way to write it into law. That is the whole purpose of this amendment.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. A further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman: Is there any mechanism available under the House rules that would permit a member of a committee where a vote has been called after a vote has been called here to be recorded in both places after the change in the House rules that abolished proxies?

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

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, I was in my prior parliamentary inquiry expressing concern about having to be two places at once. This is a different inquiry under our rules. My inquiry, Mr. Chairman, is, if a member of the Committee on Science or of any other committee of this House were serving on five or six committees and subcommittees, would that be a violation of the rules of the House?

Mr. DOGGETT. The Chair is advised that there are at least 30 Members of this House, including a member of the Committee on Science, who are serving on five or six appointments in violation of the rules of the House.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Chairman, further parliamentary inquiry, what remedy is available for a Member of this House to raise an objection to an open violation of the rules by a member of the Committee on Science or any other committee serving on five or six positions when the rules provide you can [[Page H 6198]] only serve on three? Is there any remedy?

Mr. DOGGETT. A further parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman: Has there been any approval of the 30 Members who are serving on five or six committees? Has there been any waiver granted to them?

Mr. DOGGETT. A further parliamentary inquiry then: How are the members of the Committee on Science to be advised of the Chair's awareness and decision to extend the vote beyond the degree provided in our rules?

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I came to Washington to serve as an independent voice for families from central Texas, not to march in lock-step formation for any political party. And in that independent spirit I must continue to express my concern about what is happening in this House on Medicare. The Medicare trust fund is just that, it is something in which American seniors and American middle-class families have to trust. But unfortunately in this House it is being treated not as a trust fund but as a slush fund to fund additional tax breaks for the privileged few in our society. Mr. Speaker, speaking independently, I have to say that it is strange, strange indeed, that at this point the same Republicans who criticized President Clinton now try to hide behind his latest attempt to get a balanced budget in their efforts to raid the Medicare trust fund. And those of us who have been elected to independently speak up for our constituents are going to be here speaking out about the Medicare trust fund and saying, Do not reach into the pockets of America's seniors to fund a tax break for the privileged few.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. To be candid with the gentlewoman, Mr. Speaker, there has been a tendency across this country for people to protect their own. One of the concerns that I had about our process in Texas was that it was not open enough. Our commission, the task force that I headed, actually recommended that the process be opened up more in Texas, because people would lose confidence in their judiciary, in the impartiality of their judiciary, if they could not see the process transpiring. There may be some situations with a frivolous complaint, where it is appropriate initially to evaluate it in secrecy. I do not say secrecy has no place. However, with matters of this type dragging on for months without due process, it seems to me that the public is entitled to know a little more, and surely the Members of this House ought to be able to come here in front of the American people and have a legitimate debate, given the history of this country and its commitment to freedom of expression, given the pronouncement of the Speaker himself right here in this building on March 8 that Members of Congress could say anything, and that they usually do about these matters; an intelligent, an incisive discussion of how it is that we can assure the highest ethical standards, which are demanded of the Speaker and demanded of me and the gentlewoman from Colorado and of every Member of this House.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 20 seconds. Mr. Speaker, when we talk about whimpering, this is a picture of what Republicans have told us and told American seniors they are going to do on the floor of this House. It is a total blank. That is whimpering. Had it not been for reporters, had it not been for the American Association of Retired [[Page H5580]] Persons exploring these secret task force memos, we would not know a thing. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. Waxman]. (Mr. WAXMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to respond. Mr. Speaker, it is easy to talk about billions and jillions and resolutions that are going to come. However, when we are talking about the future, I am concerned about the future of just one person like Henrietta Carter in Austin, TX, who writes me of a friend who she says just cannot afford health insurance now, ``so she suffers a lot, because Medicare doesn't take care of her doctor visits and she has nothing to help with medication. She fell and cut a large gash in her leg but refused to go to the doctor because she was afraid she couldn't pay. There are days we know she is hurting, but she just keeps on.'' That is the kind of individual I am concerned about. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from West Viriginia [Mr. Wise].

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, this Medicare Select bill does not take into consideration the tremendous changes that are going to be made in Medicare under the budget resolution which was approved in this House, unfortunately, within the last week. This Medicare Select legislation does not take into consideration the fact that though no Member of the majority has come forward to tell the American people, they are proposing a doubling of the deductible for those on Medicare. They are proposing to increase, to add new charges if a senior citizen needs to go to a lab as a result of the doctor's orders. They are proposing new charges for home health care. They are proposing that even if one has the audacity as an American senior to say, ``I want the doctor that I have always had, and I would like to stay with my own doctor, the doctor of my choice,'' that will be an extra $20 a month. All of these things need to be considered by the conferees. That is what this motion is designed to do. Mr. Speaker, I would like to emphasize what the effect of this Medicare Select will be, unless we have these conferees instructed to consider this increase that has been proposed in the budget resolution increasing out-of-pocket costs to seniors, where we are going to end up. Many American seniors right now are just barely able to make a go of it. They have to make, in my district, from some of the people that I have talked with, individual seniors, they have to make a decision between whether or not they will have enough food on the table or whether they will have to pay the prescription bill that is not covered by Medicare at present. With regard to those seniors, to now load them up with additional out-of-pocket costs, charging them to see their own doctor, doubling their deductible, increasing their premiums year after year, those are the changes that have been proposed by one of the secret task forces. Those are the changes that, when it came to the floor of this Congress, after all the debate on the budget measure, not one Member was willing to come forward and fess up to the fact that those changes are there, that they are being made in the Medicare Program. Of course, no consideration has been given in this Medicare Select bill, which is not a bad idea to have Medicare Select, it just does not solve the problem if we load onto American seniors all of those additional charges. What we are trying to do, Mr. Speaker, through this instruction is to see that the conferees consider these really drastic changes. It increased out-of-pocket charges, which so many American seniors are going to have more of every year unless the conferees give adequate consideration to this.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, in view of that, I object to the request, because it has already been decided.

Mr. DOGGETT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, what we need on this whole international relations legislation is some bipartisanship consistent with the history of this Congress in providing some bipartisan support for Presidents, regardless of party, in the conduct of our international relations. My concern is that what we have, instead, is a 352-page detailed bill micromanaging foreign policy. Mr. Speaker, I do not think 6 hours more of talk, if it is the kind of talk that we have had throughout the course of this debate so far, is going to get us any nearer a bipartisan foreign relations bill. It is obvious, since this bill was supposed to be crammed through yesterday, that the votes are not there for this kind of micromanagement.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Connecticut [Mrs. Kennelly].

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Stupak].

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Markey].

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Klink].

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Brown], representing Oberlin and environs.

Mr. DOGGETT

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell], the distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Commerce.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Speaker, we have been told that this is a debate about MediGap, and indeed it is. It is a debate about whether or not these conferees will consider the realities of what has occurred on this House floor with reference to the cuts and the increases in out-of-pocket costs to Medicare recipients across this country. There is a giant MediGap, because another 30 minutes later all we have is a blank page from the Republican Party with reference to what they are going to do to seniors across this country. They refuse to come to this floor and tell the people of America what the journalists have found, what the American Association of Retired Persons has found, that when a senior anywhere in this country reaches for their wallet to pay for the same level of health care, they are going to reach in and find it does not stretch as far as it used to, because their premiums, their deductible has been doubled, their premiums have been raised, new out-of-pocket costs face them, and instead of MediGap, the kind of insurance we are going to need is medigorge, because a giant gorge is being created that will not be filled unless this instruction is approved.

Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.