On the recordMarch 4, 2010
Madam Speaker, I do appreciate the gentleman--and I am extending my words to him at this time. I do appreciate the gentleman, Mr. Oberstar, for being available to come down to the floor, but that is not the process. The process is the gentleman should have been upstairs at the Rules Committee. There was not one person available on behalf of the majority to come up to the Rules Committee to explain the bill. An explanation of, ``Well, none of this is new,'' is an inadequate explanation to the American people and to this body, and the Speaker should be embarrassed. This is not open. This is not, I believe, ethical, because the decisions were made and there was no discussion. I believe we are calling into question, Republicans are calling into question today about how this House is being run. And I do appreciate the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar), and, in fact, I admire him a lot. Despite its being only perhaps 15 or 18 pages, that is an inadequate explanation. This House should not stand for it. The Members of this body should say we will not tolerate this. And I am deeply disappointed once again. Madam Speaker, I yield such time he may consume to the ranking member, the gentleman from San Dimas, California. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)
