Providing for Consideration of H.R. Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, Providing for Proceedings During the Period From July Through September and for Other Purposes

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Speaker, being as we have no additional speakers, I just would like to inquire of the gentlewoman from New York if she is ready to close.

The rule we have considered today provides for consideration of an important and badly needed bill. This legislation funds critical activities, such as wildfire mitigation and response, PILT payments for counties with large amounts of Federal lands, fish hatcheries that are helping to meet salmon recovery goals, the $12 billion maintenance backlog on our National Park Service lands, and the need to address the problem of lead in drinking water across our country.

This is also a fiscally responsible bill that reflects House Republicans' priorities in tackling our out-of-control national debt. This is accomplished by striking a smart balance between funding essential programs and making responsible reductions to lower priority activities to ensure we meet our tight budget guidelines. This bill includes provisions that will roll back and prevent many harmful Federal regulations that have had a chilling effect on business development and economic activity at a time when we can ill afford either.

The measure protects the rights of law-abiding Americans by prohibiting Federal agencies from issuing new closures of public lands to hunting and recreational shooting as well as from regulating the lead content of ammunition and fishing tackle.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation recognizes and respects the current fiscal landscape, lowers overall funding in the bill by $64 million below current levels and $1 billion below the President's request, yet it still provides the means necessary to fund the Department of the Interior and environmental programs that protect and promote our natural resources with a responsible, yet sustainable, budget.

Additionally, the measure provides critically needed funds to ensure forest health and combat wildfires, a priority for many living in the West who have seen devastating wildfires destroy homes, businesses, and millions of acres of land over the last few years.

This is a strong rule that provides for the consideration of a very important bill, and I urge my colleagues to support the rule's adoption and invest in a prosperous future for our country by passing the FY 2017 Interior and environment appropriations bill.

The material previously referred to by Ms. Slaughter is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 820 Offered by Ms. Slaughter

At the end of the resolution, add the following new sections:

Sec. 15. Immediately upon adoption of this resolution the Speaker shall, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1076) to increase public safety by permitting the Attorney General to deny the transfer of a firearm or the issuance of firearms or explosives licenses to a known or suspected dangerous terrorist. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. All points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. If the Committee of the Whole rises and reports that it has come to no resolution on the bill, then on the next legislative day the House shall, immediately after the third daily order of business under clause 1 of rule XIV, resolve into the Committee of the Whole for further consideration of the bill.

Sec. 16. Clause 1(c) of rule XIX shall not apply to the consideration of H.R. 1076. ____ The Vote on the Previous Question: What It Really Means

This vote, the vote on whether to order the previous question on a special rule, is not merely a procedural vote. A vote against ordering the previous question is a vote against the Republican majority agenda and a vote to allow the Democratic minority to offer an alternative plan. It is a vote about what the House should be debating.

Mr. Clarence Cannon's Precedents of the House of Representatives (VI, 308-311), describes the vote on the previous question on the rule as ``a motion to direct or control the consideration of the subject before the House being made by the Member in charge.'' To defeat the previous question is to give the opposition a chance to decide the subject before the House. Cannon cites the Speaker's ruling of January 13, 1920, to the effect that ``the refusal of the House to sustain the demand for the previous question passes the control of the resolution to the opposition'' in order to offer an amendment. On March 15, 1909, a member of the majority party offered a rule resolution. The House defeated the previous question and a member of the opposition rose to a parliamentary inquiry, asking who was entitled to recognition. Speaker Joseph G. Cannon (R-Illinois) said: ``The previous question having been refused, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Fitzgerald, who had asked the gentleman to yield to him for an amendment, is entitled to the first recognition.''

The Republican majority may say ``the vote on the previous question is simply a vote on whether to proceed to an immediate vote on adopting the resolution . . . [and] has no substantive legislative or policy implications whatsoever.'' But that is not what they have always said. Listen to the Republican Leadership Manual on the Legislative Process in the United States House of Representatives, (6th edition, page 135). Here's how the Republicans describe the previous question vote in their own manual: ``Although it is generally not possible to amend the rule because the majority Member controlling the time will not yield for the purpose of offering an amendment, the same result may be achieved by voting down the previous question on the rule. . . . When the motion for the previous question is defeated, control of the time passes to the Member who led the opposition to ordering the previous question. That Member, because he then controls the time, may offer an amendment to the rule, or yield for the purpose of amendment.''

In Deschler's Procedure in the U.S. It is one of the only available tools for those who oppose the Republican majority's agenda and allows those with alternative views the opportunity to offer an alternative plan.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source