Vic Snyder

Mr. SNYDER

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. SNYDER

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, once again I have to call attention to the fact, while Mr. Davis is here today in his role as a congressman from Illinois, he is an Arkansas native; and we are proud to have him always in this body but particularly on these bills involving Arkansans. I just want to take a minute and add my voice in praise of Congressman Hammerschmidt. This is not the first honor he has received. It will not be the last. He is a kind, intelligent man with good judgment, always very professional throughout his career in his dealings with everyone, regardless of party or class or financial status. He certainly had strong opinions and had his own sense of what was right and wrong, but he always worked in a bipartisan manner. After retiring from this body, he has continued to be very active both in Arkansas and nationally; and maybe with the passage of time, as buildings come and go and names come and go, at some point this facility may be renamed, or it may be torn down and a new facility built and some other name will be attached to it. But I can guarantee you it will not be anyone more professional or kind or with a better sense of treating people well than Congressman Hammerschmidt.

Mr. SNYDER

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this oppressive, undemocratic rule, a rule inconsistent with the great traditions of the people's House. So many amendments that were proposed by good Members of this body were not allowed to be considered today. And let me give you three examples. Number 1, no amendment was allowed to deal with the issue of Members getting rides on corporate jets. Let me put this in perspective for you with real numbers. Today my wife is 35 weeks pregnant. A few weeks ago, I priced what does it cost if this happens in the middle of the night and I need to try to get home quickly to be with her when she goes into labor: $12,000 on a charter service for me to get home to Little Rock to be with my pregnant wife. Do you know what the first class ticket costs with Northwest Airlines? $680. So an alternative for me is to call up one of my good corporate friends and say, can I catch a ride on your plane? I will give you $680, and neither one of us will say, oh, by the way, that means you gave me an $11,300 gift. I think that people should be able to ride on planes. But they should pay the fair market value. That amendment should have been allowed to be discussed and brought on the floor. Second, the chairman and I had a discussion at the beginning of this session about my feelings. I had an amendment proposed in the Rules Committee yesterday to greatly restrict the ability of former Members who are registered lobbyists to be on the floor and participate in some of these activities that we know as the Members dining room and the parking garage and the gym and all these kinds of things. Because here is the issue: when my constituents come from Arkansas, they have to go through the security. Members who are registered lobbyists do not. When my constituents come from Arkansas, they don't get to go to the Members' dining room. When my constituents come from Arkansas they don't get to roam through the halls and go in the back rooms of the committee rooms. Former Members who are registered lobbyists do. My amendment was not allowed on the floor to be considered. If you don't like it, vote against it; but let me have this discussion. Third, an amendment that deals with lobbyist-funded meals was not allowed. An amendment to deal with the ban on lobbyists-paid meals was not allowed. Are we so dependent on lobbyist-funded meals for our lunch money that we won't even let an amendment come on the floor of the House? Well, I have got a solution. I have got $5. I will leave it over here on this podium. If any Member is so dependent on not having lunch money, so dependent on lobbyist-funded meals, take the $5. But let us have a vote on these very important amendments. Vote against this rule. It is a bad rule, undemocratic.

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. SNYDER. Obviously, Mr. Speaker, me going back to Little Rock, Arkansas, to be with my wife as she goes into labor is not a campaign event. That is not the issue. We are talking about people catching rides for all kinds of reasons.

Mr. SNYDER

Mr. SNYDER. Madam Speaker, it is starting to be a pattern here of the Arkansans lining up here in support of this bill, both Republican and Democrat, but it is the kind of bill that in any State we would all do the same thing, Republican or Democrat, to preserve this kind of a historic place. Obviously, we are all very much aware that during his time in office President Clinton was a controversial figure. Any President is these days, but what we are talking about is preserving the childhood home, the birthplace home, of this President. As a person who is the child of a single-parent household, I think it is important that we enrich those sites that have been preserved so this story can be told also, that no longer are our Presidents, like Abraham Lincoln, reading by firelight because there was no electricity in those days, but in this modern era that any child in America, regardless of background, can rise above that background, take those values that he learns and, regardless of party affiliation, go on to achieve great things in this country. So I think this is very important. I am very much appreciative of Mr. Hastert and Mr. Pombo for allowing this bill to come to the floor. Our Republican Governor, Governor Huckabee, is also supportive. And also, thanks today to the people of Hope who have kept this site in a state of suspended animation and preserved it while their Federal Government catches up with them in recognizing the significance of preserving and maintaining for all time this modest home.

Mr. SNYDER

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, the history of Senator Caraway is a wonderful history, and I keep learning more things about her. There is a wonderful book that was written by former State Senator David Malone from Arkansas called ``Hattie and Huey,'' and it tells this remarkable story when Senator Huey Long came up to Arkansas to campaign for Senator Caraway. They basically barnstormed all around the small towns of Arkansas, the two of them together: Ms. Caraway, Silent Hattie; and Senator Long. It is just a remarkable and colorful story. One of the things I just recently learned in the last couple of days about Senator Caraway is that her maiden name was Wyatt, W-Y-A-T-T. Well, I have one of my favorite relatives, my uncle Dick Wyatt, who lives in Medford, Oregon, who had a stroke over the weekend and is doing well but has got a lot of recovery and rehabilitation ahead of him; but I have now got to figure out, well, is my Uncle Dick somehow related to Hattie Wyatt Caraway. One of my favorite stories about Senator Caraway was she was appointed to the seat after her husband passed away and then they had this election which essentially ratified the appointment, but it was not expected that she would run for reelection for a full regular term herself. She was trying to make up her mind what to do. I think she was with her son in her own home, and they were trying to decide what to do with a group of her advisers. Somebody said, well, let us flip a coin; and so they flipped a coin, and it came up that she should not run. It got real quiet, no one said anything, and then she said, let us go two out of three. That is when they knew she had the fire in her belly and that she wanted to run. They actually flipped the coin. It came up twice that she should run. I think this is a very fitting tribute to Senator Caraway. She has been a tremendous role model for women in America, and I appreciate the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Berry) for sponsoring this legislation.

Mr. SNYDER

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, I do. Under the rules that I just read, it refers to the Hall of the House and rooms leading thereto. I assume that means the Speaker's Lobby and the two cloakrooms. Is that the Speaker's interpretation of that rule?

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, my third parliamentary inquiry, under current rules, I see no exemption, under the current rule, for any kind of an educational function to occur during the consideration of this measure; is that correct?

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, my fourth parliamentary inquiry, this bill is now under our suspension calendar. Is it the Speaker's ruling that no amendments are allowed to broaden the application of this rule?

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, as you pointed out, you indicated, under the current rules the activities you have heard about are already not allowed under our current rules.

Mr. SNYDER. I am sorry, when the Speaker promulgates regulations, regardless of a minor change or a major change, my inquiry is: Does that or does that not require a vote of the body?

Mr. SNYDER. I will stand with you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Mr. SNYDER. You're a great reader, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry, if I might. Because of the State of the Union last night, and we always have the tradition of lots of former Members, I have two or three parliamentary inquiries that I would like to ask about the rules of the House governing this debate today. Under rule IV, clause 4, if I might read it, because I think most Members may not have looked at this in a while: ``former Members, Delegates and Resident Commissioners; former Parliamentarians of the House; and former elected officers and minority employees nominated and elected as officers of the House shall be entitled to the privileges of admission to the Hall of the House and rooms leading thereto only if, ``(1) they do not have any direct personal or pecuniary interest in any legislative measure pending before the House or reported by a committee; and, ``(2) they are not in the employ of or do not represent any party or organization for the purpose of influencing, directly or indirectly, the passage, defeat or amendment of any legislative measure pending before the House reported by a committee or under consideration in any of its committees or subcommittees.'' In Mr. Dreier's proposal today, it specifically includes all registered lobbyists, any former Members that are registered.

Mr. SNYDER. My inquiry is this: Under the current rules that we are operating under today, do the rules prohibit any registered lobbyist who is a former Member from being on the floor of the House today or in the rooms adjoining thereto?

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, I would like a further amplification on that. Clearly, a registered lobbyist, since Mr. Dreier's legislation specifically refers to registered lobbyists, who are former Members, have a direct personal interest in this legislation pending today. I am not sure how that application, perhaps I have not been clear in my question, how a registered lobbyist who is a former Member could be on the House floor today when Mr. Dreier's legislation specifically involves registered lobbyists who are former Members.

Mr. SNYDER. My inquiry is: Are those Members, former Members, who are registered lobbyists, are they not under current rules prohibited from being on the floor today because they would have, obviously, a personal interest in this, the intent of Mr. Dreier's bill?

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, my question is: If a former Member, who is currently a registered lobbyist, may that former Member, who is currently a former lobbyist, be on the floor today during the consideration of this bill?

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, that is what my understanding was.

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) for the time. I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) for his courtesy yesterday in letting me testify before his committee and then this discussion today. Unfortunately, this has been a rushed process. Our first day back in the new session and we start out with a bill being presented without amendment, with very little understanding of it. As the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) pointed out, it already is against the rules of lobbying that we have been hearing about on the House floor, as he indicated in his floor comments just a short time ago, is already against the rules. The problem on the House floor is enforcement, and so any changes we are making about lobbying on the House floor is essentially just a repeat of what is already the rule.

Mr. SNYDER. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. SNYDER. Well, that is what the current rule is. It is not just about lobbying on the floor. It is privilege. This is the current rule, the privilege of admission to the hall of the House. That is the current rule. Let me continue with my comments. To me I agree with the gentleman from Massachusetts' (Mr. Meehan) comment. This is probably not the greatest place to start but it is a place to start, but our goal ought to be this. Our goal ought to be for Joe Q. Arkansas back home, that wants to come to the Nation's capital and lobby, how can he be treated fairly and equally alongside everyone else. We have a situation now where former Members, who are well sought after when they leave this body or the Senate to be lobbyists, they have privileges that Joe Q. and Jane Q. Arkansas do not have. What are some of those? First of all, when they pull their car into one of the House parking lots, they show their former Member's ID, they are waved right in. They get a parking place. They do not have to stand in the security lines. They can just walk. They are bypassed on around. They can roam all through the halls of the Capitol or any of the office buildings in the House or the Senate side. They have access to the Members' dining room where only Members, and I have been lobbied at the Members' dining room. They have access to memorial services. I have been actually lobbied at the memorial service for a former Member that had passed away. They can roam the halls at all hours, day or night. They can go to the rooms behind the committees that Joe Q. Arkansas cannot do. So our goal ought to be to provide equality with people from back home.

Mr. SNYDER. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. SNYDER. Mr. Speaker, under the rules of the House, this is a proposal to change the rules, when a provision says the Speaker may promulgate regulations, under the rules of the House, will there or will there not be a vote of approval of those promulgated regulations by the Speaker on the definition of educational functions?