John Joseph Moakley: “the Dreier amendment is a major improvement over the text of the bill. I would, however, make one suggestion. As the…”

“the Dreier amendment is a major improvement over the text of the bill. I would, however, make one suggestion. As the gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier] explained to us, his amendment will change the point of order into a question of consideration. But I am worried that there will be no way to ensure that this process is not abused. So as the amendment now stands, if a Member wanted to avoid a vote, the Member just could raise the unfunded mandates point of order. Once that point of order has been raised, the Chair will have no choice but to put the question of consideration. There is no way to prevent a Member from making an unfunded mandates point of order, even when there is none. My amendment makes the Member who is raising the point of order show exactly where the unfunded mandate exists and explain how that language constitutes a violation. I believe that this amendment to the Dreier amendment will make a very big difference in preventing abuse of the unfunded mandate point of order. If my amendment is accepted, a Member will not be able to raise a point of order against a measure unless he or she can show that one may exist. Mr. Chairman, I have had a lot of constructive conversations with the gentleman from California. [Mr. Dreier]. I appreciate his willingness to work with us on this matter. Mr. Chairman, I hope the gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier] will accept this amendment.”