James Oberstar: “it is well known, has been debated many times in this body, that a motion to recommit that uses the term ``promptly'' is…”

“it is well known, has been debated many times in this body, that a motion to recommit that uses the term ``promptly'' is simply a motion to kill the bill by sending it back to committee, where it will take weeks to then return it to the House floor. Why an initiative to try to kill this legislation would be offered is puzzling to me, since there was no opposition to the legislation in subcommittee, full committee. Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago when the bill was debated on the suspension calendar, no one rose in opposition to the bill. There was no opposition raised to the legislation this afternoon. So the motion to recommit on the merits of the term ``promptly'' is clearly an effort to send it back to committee, kill the bill. But I point out, since the gentleman offering the motion referred to initiatives by the Democratic majority to have accountability, on page 17 of the bill, section 15-306, Personal Financial Interests, conflicts of interest, we address the issue of personal conflict of interest, of integrity of personnel employed by the commission in either the Federal co-chairman's office or the State co-chairman's office, and establish very clear obligations for reporting and excluding of such activity. Furthermore, under general Federal legislation, lobbying by a Federal Government agency of the Congress is not permitted. So this is a non sequitur motion.…”