Motion To Instruct Conferees On H.R. 2918, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2010

Floor Speech

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I would like to focus attention upon a couple of important issues related to both the bill itself and on the majority's last-minute attempts to use this bill as a vehicle for a month-long continuing resolution.

Madam Speaker, we all know the fiscal year expires on September 30, which is a week from today. Because the House and Senate have yet to complete our annual appropriations work, we must pass a continuing resolution--which, of course, we call a CR--to keep the government operating in the interim time. If we do not pass a CR, or a continuing resolution, our Nation will face a potentially devastating government-wide shutdown.

Now I think we all can agree that shutting down the government, even in the worst-case scenario, is not the preferred option. However, by attaching the CR to this Legislative Branch appropriation bill, the majority is forcing Members to choose between voting for our own office budgets or voting for a government shutdown. The majority is also using this parliamentary gimmick to avoid certain debate or votes on the floor that would occur under the normal CR process. This, Madam Speaker, is simply not the reasonable or responsible kind of governing that our constituents have sent us here to Washington to do.

In addition, the Leg Branch bill is the first of five appropriation bills by both the House and Senate to begin the conference committee work process. As the ranking member of the Leg Branch Subcommittee, I feel this bill is very important. But moving this bill forward, even above homeland security funding, is not the proper way to put a priority on meeting the critical needs facing the American people at this time.

I'm sure my Republican colleagues will have more to say on that issue as we move forward in the process. That being said, the motion that I bring forward today would prevent any extraneous provisions, including a CR, from being attached to the Legislative Branch appropriation bill and would require 48-hour viewing before a floor vote occurs.

Also, Madam Speaker, there is another issue that I do think needs to be dealt with as our subcommittee goes to conference. This is the issue of staff-led tours in the Capitol. Since the opening of the Capitol Visitor Center, many Members have expressed concern over the handling of how House staff-led tours are conducted at this time. To address this concern, we have included in the House-passed bill section 209, which prohibits the elimination or the restriction of staff-guided tours of the Capitol, except for security purposes, of course. The motion I'm offering today would instruct the House conferees to insist on this provision in conference. It is imperative that our staff be able to lead tours for our constituents and that our constituents are able to properly see this beautiful building, especially allowing it to be viewed from different standpoints. Different States have different things that they like to point out in the United States Capitol, and I think that it is certainly important that we continue to be able to do this.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to adopt this motion to instruct.
I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. ADERHOLT. Madam Speaker, I think what needs to be pointed out at this point is that as the minority here, we would like to see a clean CR passed. We were under the impression that there would be a clean CR that would be ready to be voted on tomorrow. There has been no effort by the majority to go ahead and bring this for a vote and to pass a clean CR. So that's what we would like to do. We would not like to see it attached to some other legislative vehicle but to simply pass a clean CR to make sure the government stays open. That's why I think we should do that, and we have this motion at the desk.
I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. OBEY. Madam Speaker, let me say, there are only two instances in which this is not an absolutely straight, clean CR. We do make an exception for veterans. We fund them at a higher level than we would ordinarily fund them in the continuing resolution. Secondly, we do make an exception for the Census because 2010 is coming at us whether we agree on this House floor or not. Those are the only two legislative items that depart from the traditional CR.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Wisconsin has expired.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman.
Mr. OBEY. Virtually every judgment made in the contemplated CR is the judgment which is simply that of the authorizing committee of jurisdiction, and that's what CRs are supposed to do.

Mr. ADERHOLT. I think it should be noted, the last time this happened, we were funding our troops and not funding ourselves. The bottom line is that the majority is forcing Members to choose between voting for our own office budgets or voting for a government shutdown. The majority is also using this parliamentary gimmick to avoid certain debate or votes on the floor that would occur under the normal CR process.
I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I think it's important to note that it is entirely appropriate to consider amending--at the point that we do--amending the CR to the Legislative Branch appropriations bill, which is essentially a government function. Our purpose in continuing to pursue that avenue would be to ensure that the government can continue to function.

In addition to that, because the legislative branch essentially has no significant differences of opinion, it really was the most appropriate vehicle and makes the most sense to utilize as a vehicle.
With that, I am prepared to yield back if the gentleman is.

Mr. ADERHOLT. In closing, let me say that I think it's very important, again, that we don't force Members to choose between voting for our own office budgets and voting for a government shutdown. Why are we choosing this particular vehicle for a CR? It is my understanding that the Homeland Security bill is also ready to go, and to attach it to choosing our own budgets to fund the Federal Government I think is a mistake. That's why we're concerned about the direction the majority is going on this. Therefore, we have this motion that would restrict this from being added to it.
At this point, we would ask that a clean CR be moved forward and, therefore, it would not be attached to the Legislative Branch bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.

Source