On the recordMarch 7, 2012
Well, I have read the bill. But to be told that we're going to, in a party that says they're devoted to regular order, bring out a bill--H.R. 4088 has had no committee consideration whatsoever; the other bills have, the other five. But it's never been brought up in a hearing; it's never been in subcommittee; it's never been in committee. The notion that it's a good bill and therefore should be immune from any committee process is very discouraging. This is a bill that's only been in existence for a couple of weeks. The gentleman says, well, it's a good bill; read it. Well, then I guess we don't need committees. We don't need to do anything. If it's a good bill, you read it. But the process is supposed to be one where these things go through some vetting. So I am disappointed that we have a rule that brings a bill to the floor that has literally had no committee consideration whatsoever--brand-new bill, apparently, because it's got a brand-new sponsor. We've seen nothing like this. There have been some other bills that we've had, but I've seen no bill from the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Quayle). I've seen no bill like H.R. 4088 that hasn't had a hearing, that hasn't been to committee. At the same time, the Rules Committee thinks that we can take all these interesting questions--should there or shouldn't there be an examination, say, on pay? Is the billion number right?--and debate them all in only 10 minutes, 5 minutes on each side.…
Source
govinfo.gov




