Providing for Consideration of H.R. 2985, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2006
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2985, LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2006 -- (House of Representatives - June 22, 2005)
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding me this time, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Ms. MATSUI asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, we are here to debate the rule governing the debate for the fiscal year 2006 legislative branch appropriations measure. Through this bill, we will fund the operations for our institution and the many supporting bodies that we rely upon, such as the Library of Congress, the Government Accountability Office, and the Congressional Budget Office.
While I will ultimately support the underlying bill, I would first like to address a few aspects of the rule about which I have serious concerns, specifically, the committee's addition of legislative language providing for the continuity of Congress. One of the results of September 11, and we all agree, is that we need a mechanism to allow States to replace Members of Congress in the event of a major disaster. However, adding continuity language in the manner we are today is inappropriate.
While I am pleased that the Rules Committee voted to allow debate on the Baird amendment to remove this language from the bill, I am disappointed that this language was included in the bill at all. Legislation that will have a major impact on the representation of the American people, as this language unquestionably will, should be completely and thoroughly debated in an atmosphere conducive to debate. This proposal should be addressed in the same way any other authorizing legislation would be and as it was when the House passed this measure earlier this year in a stand-alone bill.
But the Republican leadership has decided otherwise, and I raise the question that if we are to discuss this weighty issue today, why then would the Rules Committee not allow an amendment by the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney) which would set up a select committee to look into contracting abuses in the Iraq war? To date, $9 billion is missing or unaccounted for in appropriated funds for the Iraq war. This is an issue of equal significance, especially as we consider the tight budget constraints Congress faces.
Regardless of how one would vote on the amendment itself, this idea deserves the same consideration and debate as the continuity of Congress measure. I am disappointed that this amendment was not made in order as well.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to resuming the debate on the issue of the continuity of Congress.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I will be asking Members to vote ``no'' on the previous question. If the previous question is defeated, I will offer an amendment to allow the House to consider the Tierney amendment on the Truman Commission that got defeated in the Committee on Rules last night by a straight party-line vote.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the amendment be printed in the Congressional Record immediately prior to the vote on the previous question.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Feeney). Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
Ms. MATSUI. Mr. Speaker, the Tierney amendment will establish a select committee to investigate the awarding and carrying out of war-related contracts in Afghanistan and Iraq. In 1941, with the United States engaged in a major military buildup as part of World War II, Senator Harry Truman, a Democrat from Missouri, became aware of widespread stories of contractor mismanagement in military contracts and created a committee to investigate such spending.
Since 2003, there have been many examples of the misuse of American taxpayer dollars and Iraqi contracting. Nearly $9 billion on money spent on Iraqi reconstruction is unaccounted for because of inefficiencies and bad management, according to the Special Inspector General for Iraqi Reconstruction. Ensuring vigilant oversight of taxpayer dollars should not be a partisan issue. The Truman Committee was created while Democrats controlled the White House, the House, and the Senate. We owe it to American taxpayers and to our brave soldiers to oversee how the billions of taxpayer dollars are being spent in Iraq and Afghanistan. A new Truman Committee would allow us to get the facts on U.S. contracting in both military and reconstruction activities and to fix whatever problems exist.
As always, Members should know that a ``no'' vote on the previous question will not stop consideration of the legislative branch appropriation bill. A ``no'' vote will allow the House to create a much-needed select committee to investigate government contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. But a ``yes'' vote on the previous question will prevent the House from establishing this important select committee.
Again, vote ``no'' on the previous question.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
http://thomas.loc.gov