On the recordSeptember 13, 2006
I don't question the gentleman from California's right to take an opportunity to advocate on behalf of his district and the construction of that Federal facility, and I am sure he knows of what he speaks. But getting more to the point of this particular bill, the gentleman, my good friend from Florida, wanted an open rule. Of course, I understand that. I think if I were on the other side, I would always want an open rule as well. But in the spirit of openness, I want to point out to my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, that I think there were eight or nine amendments submitted. We accepted five. Three of those amendments to this bill were Democratic amendments, one was a bipartisan amendment. Yes, there was one Republican amendment. The last time we passed this bill, there were something like, we had an open rule, and there were 14 amendments that were accepted. All of those amendments are included now in the text of this bill that we are discussing today. I just want to point out that the process of bipartisanship and openness, Mr. Speaker, let me just tell you, and remind my colleague from Florida, and I know he is aware of this, but in the committee, the ranking member, Mr. Conyers, supported this bill as did Mr. Watt, Mrs. Maloney, Ms. Waters, and Mr. Frank.…
Source
govinfo.gov




