Dick Gephardt

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to be available for one additional question, is it still the gentleman's intent to have the House adjourn at 3 o'clock tomorrow?

Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. GEPHARDT. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, can the gentleman tell us if there is business beyond that that he would like to try to finish today or tomorrow?

Mr. GEPHARDT. Side stroke, all the way.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, could the gentleman tell the Members what might happen after that?

Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, and I probably will not object, I would like to inquire of the majority leader what this unanimous-consent request would result in with regard to the schedule for this morning.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. GEPHARDT. One last inquiry, Mr. Speaker, of the distinguished majority leader. Will there be any 1-minute speeches today?

Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished majority leader to inquire about the schedule for next week.

Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from New York, the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules.

Mr. GEPHARDT. The Committee on Rules is scheduled to meet on Tuesday to consider a rule regarding the constitutional amendment on the flag. Could the gentleman or the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules advise Members what rule is expected for that resolution?

Mr. GEPHARDT. On that score, on an earlier version of the schedule provided by the majority, the rescissions bill was listed. It is not on the schedule that you just outlined. You just mentioned it. I assume that you are thinking it might come forward as well next week?

Mr. GEPHARDT. If the gentleman will answer a question or two here. I wonder if the gentleman can advise Members how late he expects the House to work on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Finally, at the end of the week, we begin the Fourth of July recess. Could the gentleman advise Members whether he expects votes on Monday, July 10?

Mr. GEPHARDT. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Speaker, I would just end with one statement for consideration. I know the gentleman is trying, as we said this morning, to have a family friendly situation here and that was part of the reason I assume we had problems with cutting off times on votes. We appreciate that. I would just hope that if it can be worked out next week if there is one of the nights next week that could not be extra late, that might be helpful to [[Page H 6243]] people. I realize you are trying to juggle a lot of different bills and conference reports. But to the extent we could work to make that happen, I am sure Members would appreciate that.

Mr. GEPHARDT. I thank the gentleman. A couple of further questions. Could the gentleman advise Members as to when he expects the House to consider the budget conference report? I think he answered that and said it might be coming forward next week. I assume at this point you are not sure of that, but it could happen?

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, and I am reserving the right to object, but I will not object. I want to respond briefly to what the majority leader said. Mr. Speaker, I think what the majority leader is attempting to do is right. Our version of the facts is different than his, and I would like to give that version just for the purpose of all of us understanding what was involved here and so that we can try to not have these kinds of things happen again. As all of my colleagues know, the Speaker made a ruling early in the year that we would try to hold votes to 17 minutes. The ruling stated unless someone was in the well. Our version of the facts was that these two Members, who will speak for 5 minutes and will give their version of it in a moment, were in the Chamber, were trying very much to get into the well, but were not able to physically get there, but were, clearly understood by everybody in the Chamber, trying to vote, and in fact at some point, and there is a dispute about when they handed the card in or even handing cards in to vote, when the vote was called to an end, they were not allowed to vote. There is added suspicion because the vote was close and the majority was winning by one vote, and we had two Members coming into the Chamber, so there is added suspicion from that end of it. Mr. Speaker, there is very strong feeling on this side. I have been here now 19 years, and I have not in my experience seen the depth of feeling that occurred on this particular issue because, as the gentleman said, the thing that we all hold most dear is our ability to represent over 500,000 people in this Chamber on every issue that is voted on. These Members were doing their best to be here on time and to vote. I think there is added feeling on this side because we seem to be into a differing standard from vote to vote. As was said on the vote just before this vote, there was a long time that the clock was held open. On the vote after, on the motion to adjourn, it again was held open for a much longer time than 17 minutes. Mr. Speaker, what I think we must do, and I hope we will be able to do, is to have a small group meet and try to figure out some standard that everyone can know so we do not wind up with either the reality or the perception of unfairness in how votes are conducted. There was another issue yesterday that has also been resolved that I need to bring to the attention of the Members, and that was a situation in the Committee on Science where a vote was held in the committee after the first bell had rung and maybe after the second bell had rung, and a lot of our Members left the committee thinking there would be no other votes in the committee. They came here to vote and missed a vote in the committee. The chairman of the committee rectified that this morning by having a revote in the committee so that people who had not voted in the committee could get the chance to vote, and on this issue, too, I think we need to have an understanding as to when votes will not be held in the committee after the bells have begun to ring at some point. The final thing I would say is that the most important thing we bring here is our ability to cast a vote. All of us love this House. All of us come here with a serious purpose of representing over 500,000 people. We must never call into question, in perception or in reality, that we all are treated fairly in our ability to vote in committee and our ability to vote on this floor. This is the people's House, and, if there is ever a perception that we are not running this House in a fair manner, perception and reality, then we are in great difficulty. The minority will work in every way possible to make sure those standards are established and that they are lived with, and I believe that the right thing was done here today, and I hope and believe the right thing will continue to be done. I would like, as part of the request, to have the Members on our side have 5 minutes to explain their version of what went on.

Mr. GEPHARDT. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Mr. GEPHARDT

Mr. GEPHARDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor St. Louis City Hall employees for their efforts on behalf of the victims and families of the Oklahoma City tragedy. The Recorder of Deeds, Sharon Quigley Carpenter, and her staff organized a fund-raiser in conjunction with other departments in City Hall and raised a total of $3,415.50. In addition, city hall employees sent a sympathy card to Oklahoma City signed by hundreds of people who either worked or came into City Hall on business. The initiative taken by the employees at St. Louis City Hall demonstrates their caring spirit. It is a model of action stimulated by compassion and empathy. I want to salute these employees for their selfless and generous contributions to the victims of Oklahoma City.