Rob Andrews: “After 30 years of partisanship and 30 years of red ink, I thought we learned something in 1997. When the parties work…”

“After 30 years of partisanship and 30 years of red ink, I thought we learned something in 1997. When the parties work together, they can balance the budget, and we should all be proud that we did that in 1997. There is a proposal that would build on that tradition. It was put forward by the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Minge) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Stenholm). It deserves a hearing on this floor. It is not perfect. It may not even win majority support. I would support it, as I intend to support the budget offered by the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt), but it deserves a hearing because it builds a bridge between the two parties, and it builds a bridge between this House and the other body. We should reject this rule because this rule rejects our right to fully and fairly debate all of the alternatives before the American people. Reject this rule. Give us a chance to debate all the alternatives.”