Legislative Program

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM -- (House of Representatives - February 02, 2005)

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute.)

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I take this time for the purpose of inquiring of the majority leader the schedule for the week to come.

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

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would be pleased to yield to my friend, the gentleman from Texas, the majority leader, for the purposes of informing us of the schedule.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished whip, the gentleman from Maryland, for yielding to me.

Mr. Speaker, the House will convene on Tuesday at 2 p.m. for legislative business. We will consider several measures under suspension of the rules. A final list of those bills will be sent to Members' offices by the end of the week. Any votes called on those measures will be rolled until 6:30 p.m.

On Wednesday and Thursday, the House will convene at 10 a.m. We likely will consider additional legislation under suspension of the rules, as well as H.R. 418, the Real ID Act of 2005.

Finally, I would like to remind Members that we do not plan, do not plan, to have votes next Friday, February 11.

And I thank the gentleman for yielding to me, and I would be happy to answer any questions he may have.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman for the schedule.
With reference to the Real ID bill, Mr. Leader, can you tell us at this point in time the type of rule that that will be considered under; and, in particular, what amendments, not necessarily specific amendments, but whether amendments will be allowed, motions to recommit, and items of that nature.

Mr. DeLAY. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I would assume that the Committee on Rules would follow a process similar to the one that they followed for the rest of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, and that is to have a structured rule that allows for a variety of amendments. But I will let the chairman of the Committee on Rules make announcements on that and reserve decisions for the committee on what those amendments will be.

I can tell the gentleman that we are contemplating, although actions by the Committee on Rules will need to be taken, contemplating a rule that would merge the border security bill into another bill, another must-pass piece of legislation, not knowing what that would be. But, obviously, the supplement could be a candidate for that.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time once again, I presume the gentleman is talking about merged at some later date. Obviously, the must-pass bill would not be available next week. Am I correct?

Mr. DeLAY. That is correct.

Mr. HOYER. So the gentleman is talking about merging it at some time in the future after passage?

Mr. DeLAY. That is correct.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, with respect to the energy bill, it is my understanding that there is some discussion that the energy bill may proceed not next week but the week following. Can you tell me whether that is a reasonable possibility, or probability?
Mr. DeLAY. We are contemplating several major pieces of legislation that we would hope to complete before the Easter break, and we are also contemplating several bills that we contemplate completing prior to the Presidents' Day district work period.

The comprehensive energy bill, which we passed in the last Congress and in the 107th Congress, is a very high priority for this year. There is a good chance that we could consider a national energy policy bill before the Presidents' Day district work period.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, I might say that I think all of us understand the importance of energy legislation. All of us understand the necessity to become energy independent. I would suggest, in that framework, that I think personally that we can pass an energy bill. Obviously, there are some items that are in the energy bill or that are proposed for the energy bill that have significant opposition on one side of the aisle or the other.

I would hope, Mr. Leader, if we could, in working with the various committee Chairs, and I suppose most primarily the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Dingell) in this respect, to come to as bipartisan an agreement on the substance of that bill so that we could see it not just pass through the House of Representatives, which may be interesting in terms of the political claim that we passed it, but which does nothing for our energy independence, which is, I think, our objective.

So I would hope that we could deal with this in as bipartisan a fashion as possible so that when we send it to the other body that we may have more success there, more success out of conference, and send a bill to the President that will facilitate both energy independence and the effective and efficient discovery, development, and delivery at retail to the consumer of energy options. I do not know whether you want to say anything.

Mr. DeLAY. Well, Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I would just say that the gentleman is right. We will try our best to reach out and make this bill as bipartisan as possible.

I would just remind the gentleman that this bill, this energy package, has passed, I cannot recall every time, but many times in the last Congress; and it even passed this House as a conference report. Each time that the energy bill has gone through this House, whether it be the House bill or in the conference report, it has enjoyed a very large Democrat vote.

So, yes, I would hope that the chairmen of the respective committees that have a piece of this bill, and I would also remind the gentleman that the Committee on Ways and Means has a very big piece of this bill, would reach out to their ranking members and work to put together as bipartisan a bill as possible.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for referencing the Committee on Ways and Means, but I certainly agree with him that having the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) work closely together, and perhaps their respective Chairs of the subcommittees that might deal with that work together, would be very, very useful to accomplishing an objective as opposed to simply passing a bill that then languishes in the Congress and never gets to the President.

If, in fact, we consider that, and it sounds to me like we certainly do not have enough information to determine whether or not the week after next the energy bill might be on the floor, but if and when it comes to the floor, Mr. Leader, would you contemplate the possibility of having an open rule on that piece of legislation, given its importance and scope?

I am happy to yield to the gentleman for a response, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. DeLAY. I appreciate the gentleman yielding to me, Mr. Speaker.

We have not discussed any rule. Actually, we are discussing with the relevant committee chairmen whether we can get it that quickly or not. But I would imagine that the Committee on Rules would have the same sort of rule that we have had on this bill for the last couple of years. So I would not see anything changing.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I would hope on that bill, because of its great importance to the security of the Nation and to all of our consumers of energy, which is to say all of us, that we would have as broad a consideration of it as possible so that we could get everybody's ideas put on the floor, voted up or down, and move the bill with as big a consensus as we can accomplish.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the majority leader.

http://thomas.loc.gov