Relating to a question of the privileges of the House.

Mr. Speaker, under rule IX, I rise to a question of the privileges of the House, and I offer a resolution (H. Res. 324) and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is my duty as the House Democratic leader to offer this resolution. Earlier today the Committee on Ways and Means Democrats were subjected to an indignity, an indignity that no Member should have to endure.

I do not yield, Mr. Speaker. I do not yield, Mr. Speaker.

I do not yield. There is half an hour on the other side. They have plenty of time to make their point.

I will proceed, Mr. Speaker, but not before saying that I do not appreciate the gentleman trivializing a rare occasion of this House when a leader of a party stands up for a point of privilege on the House floor. If the gentleman wanted a copy of the resolution, he knew he could go right to the well and get it at the desk.

Now I would like to proceed. Earlier today, the Committee on Ways and Means Democrats were subjected to an indignity, an indignity that no Member should have to endure; but it appears that indignity is the order of the day on the majority side.

As the Democratic Members of the Ways and Means Committee were caucusing in a committee room while a bill was being read for amendment, the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means summoned the Capitol Police to remove them from that room. Make no mistake about this: the police were summoned to remove these Democratic Members because the chairman

did not want them in the room, not for any other reason. The facts could not be clearer.

As the Democratic Members of the Committee on Ways and Means were leaving the rostrum to caucus prior to other events, the chairman told his staff to call the police. How outrageous.

I will not even go into how the markup was conducted; I will leave that to the members of the Committee on Ways and Means. I will not talk about the fashion in which the Chair rammed through the reporting of the legislation; the members of the Committee on Ways and Means will do that. I want to focus on how the chairman can call upon the Capitol Police to evict Members at his whim from the committee space. We cannot let this stand. We cannot let this go unchallenged. Mr. Speaker, this resolution recites the facts, and my colleagues have heard them.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), the very distinguished ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

Mr. Speaker, now to speak to this resolution, the objection of which is that the office of the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means called the police on the Democratic Members who were assembling in a room, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means, one of the people who was evicted from the room.

Mr. Speaker, I will make an inquiry about the remaining time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to just make note of the fact that the gentleman from Louisiana has just stipulated to the facts that the police were called to go to the library to evict the Democratic Members from that room.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel).

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to note that, unfortunately, the gentleman did not hear the stipulation to the fact that the police were called before any conversations took place between those individuals, and they were called to evict the Democratic members from the hearing room.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Matsui).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kleczka), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones), the newest member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a former judge of the Supreme Court of Texas and a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Tanner), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez), the very distinguished Chair of the Democratic Caucus.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), the distinguished whip for the Democrats.

(Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.

First, I want to congratulate the Chair on the dignified manner in which he has conducted the proceedings today.

It is clear from the debate today that the Republicans have a major problem with the democratic process. It is clear that the Republicans are in denial about their behavior, and it is clear that the Democrats must draw a line in the sand on the repression of our rights in this Congress.

My resolution does just that. It says to the Republican majority that our constituents have a right to be heard. Every day that right is abused; but today, the Republicans went over the edge.

The facts are these: the police came to the library behind the committee, while the bill was still being read. There is no confusion as to why the police went to the library, and the police did not go to the library once or twice. They went to the library three times to evict the Democratic Members. First came the policeman and then came their superior and then came a representative of the Sergeant at Arms office to clear the room, to evict the Members from that room.

That is why, and if there is any challenge to these facts, we can take up this discussion under oath under the auspices of the Committee of Standards of Official Conduct.

We must insist on this House supporting the resolve that it is wrong for the Chair to conduct his committee meetings and have part of that be by calling the police, and we must insist that the markup that took place is not validly ordered reported to the House.

There is no confusion. The question before the House is this: Is it right for the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means to call the police to evict Democratic Members from their meeting place? Again, the police came not once, not twice, but three times.

A vote for my resolution is a vote to reject that kind of behavior. It is wrong for the committee Chair to call the police, and my Republican colleagues just do not know that; and the country should know that about them. Why is it not clear to you that it is not right to call the police to evict your colleagues from a room?

What should be a stunning fact to the American people is that the Republicans in the House of Representatives need to be convinced that it is wrong to call the police to evict their Democratic colleagues from their meeting. I say that over and over again.

We talk about the power of ideas. We heard the brilliant speech yesterday of the Prime Minister of Great Britain, talking about liberty and the pride we should take in our contribution to it throughout the world and about the power of ideas; but the power of our example speaks louder than all of that. And what is the example that we show to the rest of the world when we have a chairman of the committee calling the police to evict his colleagues from a room?

The Greeks had a word for it, ``hubris.'' It was about power, abuse of power, arrogance; and it is a tragic flaw. We cannot allow your tragic flaw to shut down the voices of the American people. We will fight you every step of the way, every day in this House of Representatives.

I want to thank my Democratic colleagues for staying, for their thoughtful presentations during this difficult debate, and for their love of this institution; and I urge my colleagues to support this very important resolution, important to the integrity of this House of Representatives.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I would hope that this discussion at the end of the day would tend to bring more civility to the relationship between the minority and the majority Members. We can continue the animosity. We can continue the ill feelings. But this would not serve our Nation well, and it certainly should not make Democrats or Republicans more proud to be a Member of this august body. We should be proud when we differ when we debate; but once we start eroding and abusing the powers of the majority, we do not do it for this Congress, but we do it for the Congress that follows. We do not have that right. No one person has the right to take away the rights that have been given to us by the Constitution in this great Nation.

Last night, just before midnight, a substitute pension bill was filed. After midnight, its description was filed. The underlying bill was a $230 billion bill of 207 pages. The substitute was a $50 billion bill and 90 pages. Members of our committee, Democratic members and I would suspect Republicans as well, had no clue as to the fact that this was coming up on a Friday; and when it did come up, we did not have time to read to see what were the major differences between the substitute and the underlying bill.

When the chairman of the committee asked for unanimous consent to waive the reading of the substitute, I objected and there was some discussion, but I maintained the objection because the Chair really had made up his mind that he was going to move forward with that legislation.

After talking with some of the senior members of the minority, we decided that we had go to the library. This library has been used historically since I have been on that committee for discussions with majority, minority, collectively. It has been used by the Trade Caucus, Republicans and Democrats. It is a beautiful place right behind our beautiful hearing room.

We went back there just to discuss what was in the substitute and how we would handle it. We were not there, I want to emphasize that all of these things are recorded because the time factor is so essential. I was not in that room 2 minutes when I was approached by the chairman's chief of staff who asked me and the Democrats to leave the library. I asked why. She told me because the chairman wanted to use the library for the Republican members. I asked her to advise the Chair that we were not leaving.

It was less than 3 minutes that a House Capitol policeman came and said that a disturbance has been reported. All of the Democrats were in the library at this time with the exception of the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) who was outside to make certain that if there was an attempt to waive the rules, the reading of the substitute, that he could object.

The police officer asked us to leave because he was reported that there was a disturbance. I asked what did he intend to do because we were not leaving. He said he would report to his superior.

In less than 3 minutes a lieutenant came of the Capitol policemen. I asked him why was he there, and he stated because the patrolman had received this message, and he had received notice that he was to remove us. I told him what I told the police officer, that we had decided collectively that we would not be moved, and I asked what they intended to do. He said that he had to get a better reading of this from the Sergeant of Arms.

The Sergeant of Arms came and said he was advised by the Capitol Police that the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means asked that we be removed from the room. I said we would not be removed, and the Sergeant of Arms said that he thought that was an issue to be resolved by Members of Congress and members of the committee.

I suggest to you that once we start taking away the privacy of Members, the privacy of members of the committee the privilege to use space that is there for the sole purpose of us to deliberate, then it is a situation that effects not me, not the Democrats on the Committee on Ways and Means, not the Democrats and Republicans in this House of Representatives, but it effects this institution.

We should not allow the abuse of power or personalities to interfere with the responsibilities we have. We have a responsibility to pass this Congress, certainly, if not in better shape, than in no worse shape than the great institution that we inherit it.

Mr. Speaker, we are not going to have much of a dispute here. First of all, we were not saying that the majority violated any rules by giving us the substitute 2 minutes before midnight and the description right after midnight. That is your prerogative to do. We think it is wrong. We are not charging you with violating rules. And the time fact as to when we got up to leave, yes, we did. We had to decide what we were going to do, and we did get up and leave the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) behind.

The question is, did the chief of staff come as soon as we got up and say that the Chair told us to leave the room? And even though you may not know who directed the sergeant, the police to take us out of the room, the record will show they received a call and they know who they received it from. It was from the chief of staff from the Committee on Ways and Means or someone saying they were speaking for the chief, and it was after that that the police came.

I do not know whether the chairman rescinded the direction to kick us out of the room, but what we are saying today is that that never should have happened. That room belongs to us just as much as it belongs to the Republicans. So we are not arguing with you about violating the rules, but when we objected, that is the only thing that we have. We used the tools that we have. We did not give you unanimous consent to have the substitute to be considered. You may call it a waste of time. We have call it our constitutional prerogative.

Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere belief that at the end of the day we will all be reading from the same page.

In order for us to really resolve this issue, truth has to prevail. I suggest to the majority that we will be referring to the timing of the telephone calls, which is recorded. No one is going to dispute in this House that the police were called and they arrived in the library prior to the time that the gentleman from California (Mr. Stark) and members of the majority had any problem. I repeat, the police were called and arrived, and I am referring to the time clock and the record. So that is all I have to say about this. Whether they should have been called and they were not called to stop any disturbance, they were called to get us out of that room.

Mr. Speaker, we are getting closer to the truth. And if what the majority is saying is that somehow the chairman recognized that what he did was wrong and rescinded that, we in that room had no idea that it was rescinded. The police had us in that room. They sent for their superior, and they sent for the Sergeant of Arms. The same person who came to tell us that the chairman wanted us to leave could have very easily come into that room and said that the chairman had changed his mind. That did not happen.

Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

The majority has not been supplied with a copy of the resolution, Mr. Speaker; and it is hard for us to proceed without a copy of the resolution.

I thank the Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), a member of the committee.

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

Before I yield to the gentleman from Colorado, I would point out that the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, as the chairman of any standing committee, has the prerogative to call the Sergeant at Arms to maintain order in his committee, and that was the basis of the chairman's call for the Sergeant at Arms.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. McInnis), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself so much time as I may consume.

Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, none of us, at least who have spoken here on the floor, knows who told who what when; but I do know, I do know that I was told by a member of the staff, the majority staff of the Committee on Ways and Means, that that staff person went back to the library, which is the room in question, it is not the hearing room, that the Democrats were asked to move from. It was the library and prior to the Sergeant at Arms and the police getting there, the staff person went back and notified the minority that that room was to be used during the markup, it was reserved, and they would have to move to 1129, which is another Ways and Means room just down the hall.

So I want everyone to know that that transpired before the Sergeant at Arms and the police got to the library to ask the minority to move out of that room.

So I think what we have here, in total, to support this proposal, this resolution, is a very short period of time, minutes, during which the Sergeant at Arms, the Capitol police were told by someone to remove the Democrats from the library to another room, to another Ways and Means room; and very shortly after the Capitol police, Sergeant at Arms arrived in the library, the chairman of the committee, in my presence, directed the staff to go back and tell the police and the Sergeant at Arms that it was all right for the minority to use the library.

So even if it was the chairman who directed, ordered the police and the Sergeant at Arms to the library specifically to tell the Democrats to move out of that room, it would have been a

mistake that was corrected almost immediately by the chairman. And for that you bring a resolution to the floor of the House? I think that those who would do this might have a bad memory with respect to their own actions at times during their lives and wish that their actions would not be judged so harshly for so short a period of time.

So, insofar as any other basis for this resolution, as I have pointed out, there is no basis for determining that the committee was out of order or acted contrary to the rules of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Hayworth), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I would tell my friend from California (Mr. Matsui) that he was not in the hearing room and, therefore, he cannot speak with any authority about the time line within which events transpired. I was in the hearing room. I know that the behavior of the minority prior to the completion of the reading of the bill warranted the Sergeant at Arms being called. So I would caution the gentleman not to make absolute statements which he cannot back up with any certainty.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Washington (Ms. Dunn).

Mr. Speaker, may I request the time remaining on each side?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Hulshof), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Connecticut (Mrs. Johnson), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, the previous speaker says that is the truth, but the fact is he was not there. He has no independent knowledge of who called the Sergeant at Arms or the reason for it. I resent the gentleman's tone. It is erroneous. His statement is erroneous.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

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

Hyperbole is something that is used often for effect, even in fictional writing. On the floor of the House debating something this serious, I think it has

no place. And to claim that the police were there to arrest Democrats is indeed hyperbole. No one ever suggested that anyone was to be arrested. There is no evidence to that. Not even any hearsay to that. The fact is they were being asked to move from that room to another Ways and Means hearing room.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/4\ minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Weller).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Ryan), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Lewis), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. English), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, assuming that the gentlewoman from California has only one remaining speaker and that is to close, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Hulshof), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 20 seconds to the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger), a member of the committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the remaining time.

It is time for the House to bring to a close this resolution. I would say that in no way has the minority, which brought this resolution to the floor, proved any facts which would substantiate a rationale for passage of this resolution, and I would urge all Members on both sides of the aisle to reject this resolution and vote ``no.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I have a privileged motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, so what? I mean, so far, we have had a discussion of he said, who said, cops came, Sergeant of Arms was called, these types of things, but let us look at the resolution.

The resolution says that the House of Representatives disapproves the manner in which the gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) conducted the mark-up of legislation in the Committee on Ways and Means on July 18, 2003, and find that the bill considered at that mark-up was not validly ordered reported to the House. Well, I think it is important that we talk about what happened.

The only thing that was in dispute is, and that I can see here is, to whether a timely objection was made to dispense with the reading of the bill itself, and the Democrats or the minority party were all back in the library with the exception of one; and he was engaged in a conversation with the staff when the motion was made, and at that time, the chairman said, Hearing no objection, it is considered as read and open for amendment at any time.

With that, the lone minority Member in the room got up and left. At that time, the chairman yielded the floor to the main sponsor of the bill, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), on the majority side. The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) then proceeded to describe the bill and talk about the bill for a number of minutes, for a long period of time, at which time the minority party had plenty of time to come back into the room, but they had all left.

Now, if you were to say that this was an improperly crafted, improperly passed bill, then all the minority has to do at any time is to get up and leave the room. There was clearly a quorum in the room. The bill was called up and it was voted upon. That is what we are here to decide.

Now, if we are to decide personalities, then this is not the place for it. As a matter of fact, our rules of the House decorum says that we are not supposed to get involved in that, but we could get involved in it for a long time, for a lot of Members; and we cannot do that because of the decorum of this House of Representatives.

My friend, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), and he is my friend, he objected that the minority has the right to use any of the rooms, just as the majority does. I am sorry, that is not the way the rules of the House are written. The gentleman from California (Mr. Thomas) controls those rooms, but that is not what is complained about here.

What is complained about here and what we are here to debate today is whether or not there was a proper handling of the rules with regard to the legislation itself, the legislation itself. There is a lot of blame to go around.

I quite frankly, prior to the start of this hearing, I tried to get the Speaker or somebody to try to work this out so this thing could be defused over the weekend. It desperately needs defusing.

The Committee on Ways and Means is one of the premier, if not the premier, committees within this House of Representatives. We do need to work on some decorum within the committee; we know that. It is the premier committee in the House of Representatives.

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I would say to the gentleman, I was sitting there right next to the chairman. The minority Member that was sitting there alone, the only one in there, physically threatened a majority Member.

Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentlewoman, a respected member of the Committee on Ways and Means who was a judge, I would say that I also was a judge, and if anyone had conducted themselves like that in my courtroom, they would have been held in contempt of court.

Mr. Speaker, hopefully to further clarify some of the questions that have been asked, and I see the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) has been provided a transcript from this morning's Committee on Ways and Means markup, what I would like to do is read the relevant portions, I think, which then necessitated the calling of the Sergeant at Arms.

This would be at page 15, line 331, the chairman stated, ``If the gentleman will suspend. If the gentleman from California would understand he is reading the table of contents, which is at the beginning of the bill.''

The remaining minority Member said, ``Oh, that.''

Line 335, ``Chairman Thomas. He will then move to the body of the bill. That is how these things work.'' To which the sole Member of the minority party that was left in the room said this at line 337, ``Its eloquence overwhelms me, Mr. Chairman, just like your intellect does. It is--oh, you think you are big enough to make me, you little wimp? Come on. Come over here and make me. I dare you.''

The transcript indicates in brackets ``laughter,'' to which the minority member then said, ``You little fruitcake. You little fruitcake. I said you are a fruitcake.''

Now, what the transcript does not indicate, and I would have to stay with the transcript, and just as many of us who have had previous experience in criminal courtrooms or civil courtrooms, the transcript is, of course, the cold recitation of words that are spoken.

If Members will permit me to characterize just a bit, I was sitting next to the gentleman from Colorado, and I would tell the Speaker that the words specifically regarding, ``Are you big enough to make me, you little wimp? Come on. Come over here and make me. I dare you,'' I happened to turn around in my chair because I am on the lower dais and looked up, and it was the sole Democratic member who was remaining who was directing those words directly at the gentleman from Colorado.

If Members would permit me to characterize a little bit more, even though laughter erupted, as someone who was witnessing this event, Mr. Speaker, the words were uttered in a very serious tone, dare I say in a threatening tone. I do not think I am mischaracterizing the import of these words.

This, of course, was done during the reading of the bill. Ultimately, the chairman was able to get a unanimous consent request. That is later reflected. Then we were able to move and consider the bill, but this was done before the Capitol Police were called; and were I the chairman in the same situation, I, too, would have contacted the Sergeant at Arms to return decorum to our committee room.

Mr. Speaker, what I would say to the previous speaker is the transcript is in fact true. What was not included was that in the transcript at the conclusion, again on page 18, line 24, ``And, without objection, it is considered as read.'' At that point, the chairman struck the gavel.