John Joseph Moakley

But if he is so intent in passing the supermajority, why did his party three times this year waive the supermajority that they put in themselves in changing the rules? Could the gentleman please answer that question?

Mr. Speaker, this Congress has a historic opportunity to pass limited, but meaningful health insurance reform. Just an hour from now, however, we'll begin to debate a bill specifically constructed by the Republican leadership to sabotage…

As a physician, I am particularly concerned with the section of this bill that many may not have had a chance to study. Buried within the 300-plus pages of this bill is a 29-page section called 'Administrative simplification.' Now…

Anything else, but Helms-Burton is not the answer. Let me tell the gentleman, every Member who votes for Helms-Burton, I bet within a couple of months would say, why did I do it?

reclaiming my time, I would put the strongest sanctions I could. Helms-Burton is not the answer.

this bill is a very very bad sign. It means it's time to hold onto your hats, the Republicans are going to try it again. But this time, instead of closing down the Government for political reasons, they are going to try something else…

My response was, no, it has never been proposed before June 30. Martial-law rules are multipurpose rules clearing the way for the House to act quickly on a broad range of legislative measures by stating that certain of the standing rules…

today's rule marks not the first but the second time my Republican colleagues have waived the two-thirds requirement for same day consideration of bills this session and this session just started. Mr. Speaker, it's looking an awful lot…

my recent visit to Cuba has been the subject of some controversy. Some of my colleagues, who have surprisingly never even talked to me about the trip, have cynically tried to characterize my views and the trip as insensitive to human…

first of all, the bills that my friend speaks of were single-purpose bills. This is a general bill that would allow anything to happen. Those were specific reasons to waive the two-thirds rule, but anything could be waived under this. Yes…

Mr. Speaker, this rule is typical of the politics-as-usual we're getting so used to these days. Today, on the 21st day of the Federal Government shutdown, we are looking at another attempt to back the President into a corner, to force him…

I wish that I could be with the entire House today as the House pays tribute to one of its own, Keith Jewell. As we all know, Keith is retiring after almost 30 years of service to the institution and the men and women who have comprised…

there are many reasons to oppose this bill. It undermines the ability of the U.S. Government to conduct foreign policy. It abdicates U.S. leadership worldwide. It wastes our resources on moving boxes when the challenges of the…

Mr. Speaker, this is the second rule we have granted for this bill. The first time around we said 10 hours was not enough. We said that the drop dead time was a lousy idea, and no one believed us. Now, here we are again, 2 weeks later…

Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to stand on the House floor today to publicly thank my good friend, the gentleman from New York, Mr. Jerry Solomon. Democrats were upset to learn yesterday that the Republican leadership was going to…

we are finally at the end of the contract. For 100 days America's children, senior citizens, and working families have watched the Republican Congress gut their school lunches, home heating assistance, and student loans. And for what…

Just to even it out, I know the gentleman from Mississippi is a veteran. I am a veteran, disabled veteran, so we know where the veterans are.

is it not true, I ask the chairman, that when you were in front of the Committee on Rules you said that the LIHEAP program was no longer needed?

The gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon] says this is all cut and dried. So is there any reason for any amendments to be offered by Democrats? Are we going to be given any choice when you are picking out the Democratic amendments?

I would like to have the attention of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon]. I know that the gentleman has got scheduled hearings on the term limit bill up before the committee this morning. Since we are not going to take it up until…

again, this rule is the ultimate closed rule. They say that they allowed 8 Democratic amendments to be part of the rule, but they picked out the 8; we did not. That would be like the Republican Party picking the Democratic Members to serve…

Actually, the gentleman is partially correct. I had a conversation with the chairman and I said, ``What have we got to look at; have you got a draft?'' And he says, ``No, I do not have a draft yet.'' I said, ``We would like to see what you…

Reclaiming my time, in answering to my dear friend from New York, the chairman of the committee, our side did not have that list until 4 o'clock. I never saw that list until 4 o'clock when I walked into that committee room.

This was not the list you and I were talking about. I mean, that was matters that were going on then, and it was my understanding that somewhere we would have met and sat down rather than go up and then see our choices already picked by…

I am overwhelmed. I want to make the point that the Republican Party came down and said, ``What happened in the 103d Congress will never happen again. We are going to give out open rules.'' Well, where are they?